Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Stanmore Unused Burial Ground Bill [Lords],

Read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Lancashire County Council (Rivers Board and General Powers)] Bill [Lords],

As amended, considered.

The Deputy-Chairman of Ways and Means (Captain Bourne): One Amendment substitutes "arbitration" for "determination" by the district valuer, and has been made at the request of the Treasury. The other two Amendments are of a purely drafting character.

Amendments made.

Bill to be read the Third time.

Warrington Corporation Water Bill [Lords],

As amended, considered; to be read the Third time.

Ministry of Health Provisional Order (Bucks Water Board) Bill.

Order for Consideration of Lords Amendments read.

Motion made, and Question, "That the Lords Amendments be now considered," put, and agreed to.

Lords Amendments considered accordingly.

The Deputy-Chairman of Ways and Means: One Amendment alters the limit of deviation in the adit to a well some 200 feet below the surface. The engineers find it difficult to say that they will be keeping within the existing limits, and with the approval of the Ministry, the Amendment was made in order to be on the safe side. The other Amendment is purely consequential.

Lords Amendments agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions — LABOUR CONVENTIONS.

Mr. Vyvyan Adams: asked the Minister of Labour what are the intentions of His Majesty's Government with regard to the ratification of the International Labour Office's Convention for the maintenance of migrants' pension rights?

The Minister of Labour (Mr. Ernest Brown): The views of His Majesty's Government with regard to the Convention referred to by the hon. Member are set out in a White Paper (Cmd. 5141) issued in March, 1936, of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy.

Mr. Adams: asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the Weekly Rest in Industries Convention, without any general limitation of the total working week, has now been ratified by 31 States; and whether His Majesty's Government intend to make their ratification of this Convention dependent upon a decision about the duration of the working week?

Mr. Brown: The answer to the first part of the question is, "Yes, Sir." As regards the latter part, successive Governments have not seen their way to ratify the Convention owing to certain provisions, for example, with regard to compensatory periods of rest if any work is done on Sunday, which, if put into force, would seriously interfere with the provisions of voluntary collective agreements. This is quite independent of the duration of the normal working week.

Mr. Adams: Would the Minister kindly repeat the phrase after "certain provisions," as I did not catch what he said?

Mr. Brown: I said that successive Governments have not seen their way to ratify owing to certain provisions, for example, with regard to compensatory periods of rest if any work is done on Sunday, which, if put into force, would seriously interfere with the provisions of voluntary collective agreements. As a matter of fact, a good many such agreements are in advance of the suggested alterations.

Mr. Adams: Is this ratification likely to be indefinitely postponed?

Mr. Brown: I tried to make it clear that there could be no effective ratification of it in the circumstances.

Oral Answers to Questions — PUBLIC WORKS (HOURS OF LABOUR).

Mr. Leach: asked the Minister of Labour what information he has on the hours of work per day and per week by men employed in public works?

Mr. E. Brown: The normal hours of labour, exclusive of meal-times, fixed by the Civil Engineering Construction Conciliation Board for workmen employed by members of the Federation of Civil Engineering Contractors throughout Great Britain, are eight per day (4½ on Saturday) or 44½ per week for the winter months, and nine per day (4½ on Saturday) or 49½ per week for the summer months. The normal hours fixed by the Public Works Conciliation Board for the London area, for workers employed by members of the Public Works Contractors' Association and by local authorities in that area, are 8½ per day (4½ on Saturday) or 47 per week, throughout the year.

Mr. Leach: Could not the Minister try to induce these people to reduce the weekly hours to 40?

Mr. Brown: That is a matter for the Conciliation Board itself, which is formed in the normal way of representatives of workers and employers.

Mr. Leach: Would they not take notice of the right hon. Gentleman?

Mr. Brown: Doubtless they will see this question and the answer.

Oral Answers to Questions — UNEMPLOYMENT.

CINEMA TECHNICIANS.

Mr. Sorensen: asked the Minister of Labour how many foreign cinema technicians are now working with permits in this country and the maximum and average length of time allowed by such permits; and how many British cinema technicians are at present unemployed?

Mr. E. Brown: According to the records of my Department, the number of foreign nationals under conditions as to their stay

in the United Kingdom who have permission to be employed as technicians in film production is 24. This figure does not include producers, directors, scenario writers and specialists in other than technical work, of whom there are 23 with permission to be employed at the present time. Permits for the employment of foreign nationals from abroad are granted for varying periods, in no case exceeding 12 months in the first instance, and are frequently limited to the duration of a particular production. With regard to the last part of the question, cinema technicians are not separately distinguished in the statistics of unemployment which are compiled by my Department.

Mr. Sorensen: In view of the fact that there is undoubtedly a large number of cinema technicians unemployed, would the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that no permits will be issued for foreign technicians while we have technicians suitable for the jobs?

Mr. Brown: Of course, that it my normal duty under the law, and it is carried out always in terms of each individual case.

Mr. Sorensen: Is it not a fact that there are complaints regarding the number of foreign technicians?

Mr. Brown: There may be complaints, but complaints are not always well grounded, and those which receive most publicity are often the least well grounded.

Mr. Ellis Smith: Is not the spirit of the supplementary questions inconsistent with the best traditions of this country?

PALLION TRADING ESTATE (GIRLS' WAGES).

Mr. W. Joseph Stewart: asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that there is grave concern in regard to the low rates of wages that are being paid on the Pallion trading estate, Sunderland, girls of 17 years of age being paid as little as 8s. per week for a 10-hour day; and will he ensure that, before a factory is let to any employer of labour, that employer is prepared to observe the Fair-Wages Clause?

Mr. E. Brown: I am informed that in the only factory as yet actually in operation on the Pallion estate not less than trade board rates are being paid.

Mr. Stewart: Would the right hon. Gentleman not look at evidence, if I were to send it to him, and ensure that controllers of these factories, which are erected out of the public purse, employ people at trade union rates, and are not allowed to exploit our young people?

Mr. Brown: If the hon. Member gets into touch with the firm, I think he will find that he is doing them an injustice. I have pointed out they are now paying trade board rates.

Mr. Storey: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this factory is not yet in production, that most of the girls employed are learners undergoing training, that full trade board wages are being paid, and that only 42½ hours a week are being worked, spread over five days?

Mr. Brown: That is my information, and that is why I said that, if the hon. Member gets into touch with the firm, he will find that, whoever was responsible for this publicity—I have no doubt that he put down the question in good faith—he has really done the firm an injustice.

Mr. Stewart: May I inform the right hon. Gentleman that I have in my pocket evidence to prove that this firm pays 8s.a week to girls of 17 for a 10-hour day?

Mr. Brown: I again suggest that the hon. Gentleman should discuss it with the firm, when he will find that my statement is accurate, and that trade board wages are being paid.

HOSIERY WORKERS.

Mr. Charles Brown: asked the Minister of Labour the number of unemployed

—
Sutton-in-Ashfield Employment Exchange.
Mansfield Employment Exchange.


17th January,1938.
13th June,1938.
17th January,1938
13th June, 1638.


Persons aged 16–64.


Males:


Wholly unemployed
…
40
59
9
30


Temporarily stopped
…
83
113
60
41


Females:


Wholly unemployed
…
64
64
22
61


Temporarily stopped
…
152
130
102
72


Persons aged 14 and 15.


Boys
…
1
1
—
—


Girls
…
8
4
3
3


Total, aged 14–64
…
348
371
196
207

hosiery workers, giving the figures separately for men and women, on the registers at the Employment Exchanges of Sutton-in-Ashfield and Mansfield for January, 1938, and July, 1938, respectively?

Mr. E. Brown: As the reply includes a table of figures, I will, if I may, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. C. Brown: Would the right hon. Gentleman explain the significance of the figures?

Mr. E. Brown: I could not do that except at some length, but if the hon. Gentleman asks for the totals, they run like this: Between 17th January, 1938, and 13th June, 1938, in Sutton-in-Ashfield, 348 and 371—slightly up—and in Mansfield, 196 and 207.

Mr. C. Brown: Seeing that the protection given to this industry neither maintains the wages nor preserves the employment, and that the figures that the right hon. Gentleman has just given apply over the whole range of the industry, do the Government intend to take any action in the matter?

Mr. E. Brown: If the hon. Gentleman desires more protection, I could not debate that question now.

Following is the reply:

The table below shows the numbers of insured persons in the hosiery industry classification recorded as unemployed at the Sutton-in-Ashfield and Mansfield Employment Exchanges at 17th January, 1938, and 13th June, 1938. Figures for July are not yet available.

STEPNEY

Mr. James Hall: asked the Minister of Labour how many people were unemployed in the Stepney district in June; and how do the figures compare with those for the preceding month?

Mr. E. Brown: At 13th June, 1938, there were 10,225 insured persons, aged 16–64, resident in the Metropolitan borough of Stepney, recorded as unemployed, as compared with 8,709 at 16th May, 1938.

Mr. Hall: Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that that shows an increase of 25 per cent. in the unemployed in one month, and does he not consider that such a steep rise is a matter of deep concern?

Mr. Brown: Of course, it is a matter of deep concern, but the hon. Gentleman knows well enough that this area is one in which the turnover in jobs is more, perhaps, than in any other area, because of the peculiar nature of its industries.

UNEMPLOYMENT FUND.

Mr. Day: asked the Minister of Labour the balance on the insurance account of the Unemployment Fund as at the last convenient date; the manner in which this amount is invested and the rate of interest received for same; the amount of the outstanding debt that was funded; and the average interest at present payable on this amount?

Mr. E. Brown: At 16th July, 1938, the total balance of the Unemployment Fund was about £46,141,000, invested in short-term securities suitable to the requirements of the Fund, having regard to the views of the Unemployment Insurance Statutory Committee. At the present time, the net rate of interest received on the sums invested, after allowing for profit or loss on redemption, is £1 18s. per cent. The amount of the debt now outstanding is £82, 246,000, on which interest is payable at the rate of 3⅛ per cent.

Mr. Day: In view of the difference between those rates, does the Minister contemplate any change?

Mr. Brown: No. The change was made in the law recently, with the result that the committee has complete freedom in this matter. I would point out that

there is all difference in the world between interest on money invested and interest on debt.

Mr. Day: Does not the Minister think that the amount of interest on the debt is very large?

EXCHANGES (BRANCH MANAGERS' EMUNERATION).

Mr. Rostron Duckworth: asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the branch managers of Employment Exchanges in seaside resorts suffer considerable reductions in their incomes during the season when the numbers of unemployed on their registers begin to shrink; and whether, in view of the fact that this system does not encourage the branch managers to give their best endeavours towards obtaining employment for the seasonal workers involved, he will review the present arrangements and consider their reform?

Mr. E. Brown: The terms of remuneration of branch managers necessarily take account of substantial variations of the volume of work, but I do not think that there is any foundation for the suggestion that the effect is to discourage them from endeavouring to find employment for applicants on the register. On the contrary, in assessing the volume of work, account is taken of the manager's efforts to fill vacancies. The present arrangements are based upon a recent agreement, to which the Branch Managers' Federation is a party.

SPECIAL AREAS ACTS.

Mr. Dingle Foot: asked the Minister of Labour whether it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to introduce legislation prolonging the operation of the Special Areas Acts after 31st March, 1939; and, if so, whether it is proposed further to amend those Acts?

Mr. E. Brown: No decision has yet been taken in this matter.

Mr. Foot: In view of the fact that these Acts have now only eight months to run, can the Minister say when he will be in a position to give the House some information?

Mr. Brown: Certainly not until the House reassembles.

STATISTICE, SCOTLAND.

Mr. J. J. Davidson: asked the Minister of Labour the total increase or decrease of registered unemployed in Scotland for the years 1937 and 1938, respectively?

Mr. E. Brown: I have had some little difficulty in deciding precisely what figures the hon. Member is seeking, but perhaps the following will give him the information he desires: Between 25th January and 21st June, 1937, the total number of unemployed persons on the registers of Employment Exchanges in Scotland fell by 56,376 from 271,342 to 214,966. Between 17th January and 13th June, 1938, the number fell by 30,152, from 269,999 to 239,847.

Mr. Davidson: In view of the fact that the increase and decrease of unemployment in Scotland are so regular as to indicate that after a period of five years the problem is still the same, has the Minister any special plan for dealing with this question so far as Scotland is concerned?

Mr. Brown: It is true that the figures are very similar, but I could not agree that it is the same problem at all. At 21st June, 1937, there were 15,100 temporarily stopped, whereas on 13th June, 1938, there were 37,299 temporarily stopped. That is an increase of more than 22,000 in the number temporarily stopped. It would be a mistake to regard the problem as being the same, though the figures on paper may seem to be the same.

Mr. Davidson: Do not the figures which the Minister has given indicate that in the period of eight years from 1930 there has been an increase; and does not he think it is time he had some special plans for this distressed area?

Mr. Brown: Certainly I could not accept that way of stating the problem, because we have also to observe the figures of employment, which would tell quite another story.

Sir John Haslam: Cannot the Minister use the same plan that the Socialist party used in order to solve this problem when they were in office?

Mr. Brown: I think that that was quite unreal.

Mr. Davidson: If we were given the same term of office, we would succeed.

IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY, SCOTLAND.

Mr. Davidson: asked the Minister of Labour the total number of unemployed iron and steel workers in Scotland for the years ended March, 1936, 1937, and 1938, respectively?

Mr. E. Brown: The average numbers of insured persons, aged 14–64, in the pig iron, steel melting, iron and steel rolling, etc., industry classifications recorded as unemployed in Scotland during the years ended March, 1936, 1937 and 1938 were 5,599, 4,086, and 3,781 respectively.

Mr. Davidson: Does the Minister think that this indicates that Scotland is getting its proper share of work in connection with the rearmament programme of the Government?

Mr. Brown: It indicates a drop of 1,800.

Mr. Davidson: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is an increase in the case of agricultural workers?

Mr. Brown: The hon. Member must recollect that the figures are for one month only in each year.

LICENSED TRADES (EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS).

Mr. Rhys Davies: asked the Minister of Labour whether investigations have been instituted into the conditions of employment in the licensed trades?

Mr. E. Brown: Yes, Sir, and I am in consultation with the organisations concerned with a view to the framing of a scheme for the regulation of the wages and conditions of employés.

Mr. Davies: While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for what he is doing, may I ask him whether the results of the investigations will be published?

Mr. Brown: I should like notice of that question. I do not know quite how far the consultations with the organisations have gone yet.

TOWN HALL, BRADFORD (COURT ACCOMMODATION).

Mr. Muff: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his Department will give a detailed


report on the court accommodation at the Town Hall, Bradford; and what prospect there is of the present congestion being eliminated?

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir Samuel Hoare): The responsibility for providing court accommodation rests with the local authority, and I have no powers in the matter. I understand that the existing accommodation is admitted to be inadequate, and that the question of improving it is still under consideration. I hope that the local authority may be able to reach a satisfactory solution without undue delay.

Mr. Muff: Could the right hon. Gentleman send an officer to see that at any rate a retiring room for female witnesses is provided? This is becoming a scandal.

Sir S. Hoare: I must be very careful how I interfere with the responsibilities of the local authority. I hope that the answer I have given to the hon. Member will call the attention of the local authority to the fact that I regard this question as urgent.

Mr. Leach: Will the right hon. Gentleman send a copy of this to the city council?

PRISONERS (RELATIVES' VISITS).

Mr. Gallacher: asked the Home Secretary if he is aware that Durham is the nearest point to which a Scottish prisoner can be transferred from a penal settlement in the south of England to a penal settlement nearer home for the purpose of receiving a visit from his relatives; and will he consider making arrangements between the English and Scottish prison commissioners for the transfer of such prisoners to a Scottish prison for the purpose of such visits?

Sir S. Hoare: The existing law makes provision for the transfer from England to Scotland and vice versa of persons sentenced to penal servitude and persons sentenced to detention in a Borstal Institution, but there is no statutory provision empowering the transfer from one jurisdiction to another of persons sentenced to imprisonment. I realise that in some cases hardship may result from the lack of power to transfer freely from England to Scotland, and the point has been noted for legislation at the first convenient opportunity.

Mr. Gallacher: Would it not be possible to arrive at some method of bringing about this very desirable reform? At present, prisoners in the south of England cannot go beyond Durham, and their relatives, who may live in the north of Scotland, have to travel right down to Durham to see them?

Sir S. Hoare: I have said that the point will be dealt with at the first convenient opportunity.

AIR-RAID PRECAUTIONS (DISPLAYS).

Mr. Sorensen: asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the presentation of mock air raids and air-raid precaution displays in conjunction with carnivals and similar functions; and whether, in view of the undesirability of staging air-raid precaution demonstrations in circumstances likely to divert public attention from the serious nature of air-raid precautions, he will advise air-raid precaution committees to avoid such methods?

The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Geoffrey Lloyd): My right hon. Friend is aware that air-raid precautions displays have been staged at public functions of various kinds. If a local authority thinks it desirable to bring home the need for air-raid precautions in this way, my right hon. Friend would not feel justified in advising that advantage should not be taken of such opportunities.

Mr. Sorensen: Does the hon. Gentleman appreciate the fact that these air-raid precautions demonstrations are carried out in an atmosphere of hilarity and frivolity, despite their significance?

Mr. Lloyd: I think that the local authorities are very good judges of the reactions of their own people.

REFUGEES.

Mr. Riley: asked the Home Secretary whether he will give instructions that any refugee arriving at a British port who can prove that he is escaping from religious or political persecution shall be admitted to this country?

Sir S. Hoare: I am anxious, as I have stated on several occasions in the House,


that our traditional hospitality should be extended so far as is compatible with our social and economic conditions to persons who are obliged to leave their own country on political, racial or religious grounds, but I have made it clear that there can be no indiscriminate admission, and individuals who wish to come here must be carefully selected. To enable this policy to be properly carried out, a visa requirement has been imposed on all Austrians and Germans, so that applicants can be examined before they start on their journey and the risk of rejection at our ports is minimised. It is necessary, however, to insist that persons who wish to enter this country shall enter in a proper manner, as otherwise the control which has been set up would be defeated. This policy has the support of the refugee organisations, with whom the Home Office is closely collaborating.

Mr. Riley: While appreciating the generous terms of the right hon. Gentleman's reply, may I ask whether he will be very careful to see that the right of asylum is not impaired?

Sir S. Hoare: My answer shows that that is very much in my mind. I assure the hon. Member that I am in the closest touch with the refugee organisations, and we try to deal sympathetically with individual cases as they come.

Mr. Thorne: Does not this show that, bad as this country is, it is the best country in the world?

PROBATION OFFICERS.

Mr. Sorensen: asked the Home Secretary whether probation officers attached to matrimonial and domestic courts in the Metropolitan Police area are required to have knowledge and training in the medico-psychological aspects of cases with which they may have to deal; and whether, in view of the importance of probation officers possessing this qualification, he will offer some guidance to the courts respecting the selection and appointment of probation officers?

Sir S. Hoare: The Central Training Board which has been set up on the recommendation of the Departmental Committee on the Social Services in Courts of Summary Jurisdiction is aware of the need for giving some guidance to probation officers on the matters referred

to, so as to enable them to decide when to seek expert assistance. The candidates trained under this scheme are available for appointment in London as well as in other probation areas in England and Wales.

Mr. Sorensen: May I take it that probation officers in the future will have this requisite knowledge, in view of the very intimate nature of some of the matrimonial tangles that have to be solved?

Sir S. Hoare: It is very difficult to say of anyone that he will have the requisite knowledge for anything. We do try to provide that the candidates for the probation service shall have enough knowledge to know when treatment of this kind is likely to be useful.

Oral Answers to Questions — METROPOLITAN POLICE.

EX-INSPECTOR SYME.

Mr. Thurtle: asked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the fact that the career of ex-Inspector John Syme was brought to an end through circumstances arising out of an adverse report of a superior officer, which was subsequently admitted by his Department to be unfounded, and that the ex-inspector in question, although subsequently granted a pension of £72 per annum and awarded certain arrears of pension, was never paid any compensation in respect of the premature termination of his career as a police officer, he will consider the possibility of making some payment to ex-Inspector Syme by way of compensation for the premature ending of his career?

Sir S. Hoare: This unfortunate case was most carefully considered by my predecessor, the right hon. Member for Platting (Mr. Clynes) in 1931, and, after reviewing the facts, I am satisfied that there are no grounds for reopening the questions on which a decision was then taken. The settlement of the case announced in this House by my predecessor on 21st May, 1931, in a statement of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy, must be regarded as final. This settlement and the terms in which it was announced were accepted by Mr. Syme.

Mr. Thurtle: If the right hon. Gentleman, on further examination, should find that ex-Inspector Syme did not accept


that settlement of 1931 as complete and final, and that he has constantly urged his case for compensation in respect of the ending of his career, will he agree to reconsider the matter?

Sir S. Hoare: No, Sir. I am afraid I could not deal with a hypothetical question of that kind. The case has been considered over and over again. I do regard this settlement as final.

Mr. Thurtle: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there was no compensation paid to ex-Inspector Syme in respect of the loss of his career?

Sir S. Hoare: I think the hon. Gentleman had better look at the communication I am sending him. He will then see as far as I can judge, that ex-Inspector Syme did accept compensation in settlement.

TRAFFIC DUTY.

Mr. Day: asked the Home Secretary the number of Metropolitan police officers relieved of traffic duty to date following the provision by local authorities of the electric traffic lights, and the approximate yearly saving in wages and other police charges through the introduction of same; and what notice is generally given by local authorities of their intention in instal these lights, which relieve the police from traffic duty?

Sir S. Hoare: The number of police actually withdrawn from traffic duty consequent on the installation of signals is 662. The cost of these police is approximately£180,000 a year. No public notice is required to be given of proposals to instal these signals, and the prime motion for this installation may come from the local authorities, the Ministry of Transport or the police. The time occupied by the preliminary consideration of and arrangement for any particular installation varies considerably with the circumstances of each individual case.

Mr. Day: As there is such a substantial reduction and saving, will the Minister suggest that there should be a reduction in the police rate for the ratepayers of London?

Sir S. Hoare: Obviously that is a different question.

ACCIDENT, NEWPORT, MONMOUTHSHIRE.

The following question stood upon the Order Paper in the name of Mr. THORNE:

23. To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can now give any information in connection with the girl killed by falling masonry at Newport, Monmouthshire, on Friday last, from the Savoy Buildings which are being demolished; and if the road and footpaths were protected?

Mr. Thorne: I would like to point out that I made a mistake about the date in the question.

Sir S. Hoare: I presume the hon. Member refers to the accident about which he asked me a question on the 6th instant. I understand that there was in fact no hoarding between the building and the footway at the point at which the accident happened, and that the contractor who undertook the demolition of the building has been brought before the magistrates on a charge of manslaughter, but that the bench discharged him, expressing the view that there had been negligence but no evidence of culpable negligence sufficient to justify his committal for trial.

FILM INDUSTRY (ADVISORY COMMITTEE, CHAIRMAN).

Mr. Ammon: asked the Home Secretary whether he is able to announce the name of the chairman of the new advisory committee to be appointed under the terms of the Cinematograph Act, 1935?

Sir S. Hoare: I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the Cinematograph Act, 1909. I am happy to be able to say that Lord Stonehaven has accepted the invitation of the Secretary of State for Scotland and myself to become chairman of the advisory committee.

WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION.

Mr. Tinker: asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that persons in receipt of workmen's compensation have to seek help from the Poor Law authorities; and will he consider this particular aspect as urgent and introduce legislation at an early date so as to remove this hardship by increasing the rates of compensation?

Sir S. Hoare: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on Thursday last to the question asked by the hon. Member for Stoke (Mr. E. Smith) on the same point.

Mr. Tinker: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Prime Minister, in dealing with this matter, said that certain aspects should be dealt with before the commission reported? Is this not one aspect, and a serious one, which might be dealt with before the commission report?

Sir S. Hoare: I could not give an explicit answer to that question before it is put down. I should have said that a question of this kind raised just the sort of issues that have to be considered.

Mr. Davidson: Will the right hon. Gentleman ask for representations from the local authorities?

Mr. E. Smith: asked the Prime Minister whether he can make a statement on the Royal Commission that is to consider the Workmen's Compensation Act and the effect of accidents and industrial diseases on the lives of the people; and whether he can announce the names of the commission and their terms of reference?

The Prime Minister (Mr. Chamberlain): I regret that I am unable at present to add to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member on 30th June last.

Mr. Batey: Will the Prime Minister be in a position to make a statement before the House rises for the Recess?

The Prime Minister: I hope so, but I am not sure.

Mr. Cassells: Is the Prime Minister able to inform the House as to the precise terms of reference of the proposed Royal Commission?

The Prime Minister: No, Sir, not yet.

Mr. J. Griffiths: Will the right hon. Gentleman, in fixing the terms of reference of the Royal Commission, bear in mind the importance of investigating the system by which employers insure their work-people for workmen's compensation, and, in particular, into the enormous profits made by insurance companies in this connection?

MOTOR VEHICLES (CONSTRUCTION AND USE) REGULATIONS).

Major Mills: asked the Home Secretary the number of cases in which the

power of inspecting the brakes on motor vehicles given to the police by Section 95 of the Motor Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations, 1937, has led to prosecutions; and in how many of such cases the decelerometer has been relied on as evidence?

Sir S. Hoare: I regret that the information asked for is not available.

Major Mills: Do the inquiries my right hon. Friend has made lead him to think that benches of magistrates are tending to accept the evidence of these machines?

Sir S. Hoare: I think my hon. and gallant Friend had better put that question down.

Oral Answers to Questions — EDUCATION.

BENEFICIAL EMPLOYMENT (GIRLS).

Mr. Fleming: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education whether he is aware that some local education authorities are refusing to release girls from attendance at school at 14 years of age, in order to assist their mothers at home, on the ground that such help to a mother is not beneficial employment within the meaning of the Education Act, 1936; and whether he will give a ruling on this point in order to assist local education authorities?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education (Mr. Kenneth Lindsay): I think that there must be some misapprehension as to the legal position. The considerations to which local education authorities must have regard before permitting the withdrawal of children of 14 to enable them to give assistance in the home are entirely different from those to which they must have regard in determining whether any employment will be beneficial. Moreover, the sections of the Education Act, 1936, which deal with exemptions for beneficial employment and the withdrawal of children from school to enable them to give assistance in the home do not come into operation until 1st September, 1939.

Mr. Macquisten: Is not assisting the mother at home the most beneficial of all employments?

Mr. Lindsay: That is one of the reasons why it is provided for.

TECHNICAL COLLEGES AND SCHOOLS.

Sir William Jenkins: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education the number of technical schools and technical colleges in England and Wales in 1921, 1930 and 1937, giving England and Wales separately; and the

Numbers of Technical Colleges, Schools, etc. (excluding Art Schools), recognised by the Board of Education and Numbers of Students in Attendance.


School Year.
Colleges.
Technical Schools and Evening Institutes.
Junior Fulltime Schools.
Total.


Number of Institutions.
Number of Students.
Number of Institutions.
Number of Students.
Number of Institutions.
Number of Studenes.
Number of Institutions.
Number of Students.


Full time
Part time.
Full time
Part time.
Full time
Part time.

Sir W. Jenkins: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education what number of applications has been received for technical schools; and what was the number granted and what was the number refused in England and Wales from 1930 up to the present date by local authorities?

Mr. Lindsay: I assume that the hon. Member refers to applications submitted by local education authorities for approval of proposals to provide new buildings for technical schools. As the answer involves

number of students full time and the number part time?

Mr. Lindsay: As the answer consists of a tabular statement I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the statement:

a tabular statement I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. I might add that no applications have been refused by the Board.

Sir Joseph Lamb: Will that report give the distinction between senior and junior technical schools?

Mr. Lindsay: It will not in its present form, but I might be able to make it do so.

Following is the statement:

APPLICATIONS FOR APPROVAL OF NEW BUILDINGS FOR TECHNICAL SCHOOLS: FROM 1ST JANUARY, 1930, TO PRESENT DATE.

(These figures exclude Art Schools and extensions of existing Technical Schools.)

Approved by the Board.


Local Education Authority.
Number of applications approved.


England.


Administrative Counties—


Cornwall
1


Devon
1


Dorset
1


Essex
2


Kent
3


Lancashire
1


Leicestershire
2


London
3


Middlesex
5


Shropshire
1


Staffordshire
1


Surrey
1


Warwickshire
1


Worcestershire
1


Yorkshire (West Riding)
2


County Boroughs—


Barnsley
1


Bath
1


Birmingham
1


Blackpool
1


Bolton
1


Bury
1


Coventry
1


Dudley
1


Northampton
1


Plymouth
1


Sheffield
1


Southport
1


Stoke-on-Trent
1


Sunderland
1


Wolverhampton
1


Wales and Monmouthshire.


Administrative Counties—


Carmarthenshire
1


Glamorgan
1


Moumouthshire
2

No application was refused by the Board.

Mr. Chorlton: asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education how much the new technical school at present under construction in Bury, Lancashire, is expected to cost; what grant his Department will make; also, with the declining trade, what number of students are allowed for ten years ahead; and whether any attempt has been made to obtain the necessary education required with other education authorities, and so save the cost of the new school and its effect on the rates?

Mr. Lindsay: The cost of the new technical college at Bury is expected to

amount to about £120,000, half of which will be met by grant from the Board. My Noble Friend is satisfied that the proposed accommodation is no more than is required to meet the needs of the future, as the college will be the centre for technical and commercial education for an important industrial area, with some 200,000 inhabitants. In formulating their proposals, the local education authority have had regard to the need for co-operation with other authorities, and for avoiding any overlap in the provision of technical education.

Oral Answers to Questions — PUBLIC HEALTH.

OFFICES (INSPECTION).

Mr. Short: asked the Minister of Health what steps the London County Council have taken to ensure that offices within their jurisdiction are investigated to ensure that the provisions of the Public Health Act, 1936, are applied?

Mr. Fleming: On a point of Order. Am I entitled to put a supplementary on Question 33?

Mr. Speaker: Not now.

Mr. Fleming: Further to that point of Order. Not being able to hear what was said, am I entitled to put a supplementary question?

Mr. Speaker: We have passed over it now, and are on the next question.

The Minister of Health (Mr. Elliot): The Public Health Act, 1936, does not in general apply to London. I am informed that the Metropolitan borough councils, the responsible sanitary authorities, are advised that there is some doubt whether offices come within the scope of the Public Health (London) Act, 1936, which was private legislation, and that they are considering, in conjunction with the London County Council, whether amendments of the Act should be introduced to remove this doubt.

Mr. Short: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we were given a very definite pledge by one of his predecessors that the London County Council would bring itself into conformity with this Act?

Mr. Elliot: I understand the London County Council is considering it, in conjunction with the boroughs.

Mr. Short: asked the Minister of Health (1) the number of local authorities which have appointed special inspectors to investigate the conditions of offices to ensure that the provisions of the Public Health Act, 1936, are applied;
(2) how many offices have been visited by inspectors of local authorities to see that the provisions of the Public Health Act, 1936, are being applied; and how many prosecutions have taken place?

Mr. R. C. Morrison: asked the Minister of Health whether he will take steps to obtain information from local authorities, from time to time, as to action taken by these authorities to investigate working conditions in offices under the provisions of the Public Health Act?

Mr. Elliot: The Act came into force on 1st October, 1937, and it was not considered desirable to call for reports until it had been working for a full year. I am not, therefore, in a position to give the information asked for, but I have asked that it shall be included in the annual reports of medical officers of health for the year ending 31st December next.

DIABETES.

Mr. George Griffiths: asked the Minister of Health the number of persons suffering from diabetes who are dependants of State insurance contributors; and what would be the estimated cost to the fund if the dependants were given insulin free?

Mr. Elliot: I regret that the information desired by the hon. Member is not available.

Mr. Griffiths: Will it be possible for the Minister to get this information when it is a Supply Day on the Minister's work?

Mr. Elliot: I do not think I shall be able to supply it.

Mr. Griffiths: The right hon. Gentleman will be able to manage it easily.

TUBERCULOSIS (WALES).

Mr. James Griffiths: asked the Minister of Health whether he can indicate when the report into the causes and the methods of prevention of tuberculosis in Wales will be completed; and whether it is intended to publish the report?

Mr. Elliot: I understand that the committee hope to complete their report within the next few weeks, and I will consider the question of publication as soon as I receive it.

INLAND WATER SURVEY COMMITTEE.

Mr. Robert Gibson: asked the Minister of Health why the Inland Water Survey Committee, set up by the Minister of Health and the Secretary of State for Scotland in January, 1935, has adjourned its deliberations sine die?

Mr. Elliot: The committee adjourned pending a decision on the question whether grants should be made available to catchment boards for the installation of gauges for measuring the flows of their rivers. The matter is under consideration, and it is hoped to announce a decision shortly.

Mr. Gibson: Is it the case that the Scottish side of this committee has had grants up to the extent of something like £500 and no grants have been made on the English side, and is not that the reason why the committee has reached a deadlock; and will the right hon. Gentleman see that legislative power is obtained in order that the English side of this committee may be able to get contribution in proportion to that on the Scottish side?

Mr. Elliot: I think the hon. and learned Gentleman is under a misapprehension. The question of catchment boards is different in the two countries, there being no catchment board in Scotland.

Mr. Gibson: Is it not the case that the Scottish side has been financing the committee and is it not time that the English side should do its share?

Mr. Elliot: That is a very rash assumption.

WATER SUPPLY (EVESHAM DIVISION).

Mr. De la Bère: asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been drawn to the inadequate water supply which exists in the villages of Armscote, Blackwell, and Darlingscott, in the Evesham division of Worcestershire; and what steps he proposes to take to rectify this condition?

Mr. Elliot: As my hon. Friend will be aware, the responsibility for promoting a


scheme for these villages rests with the Rural District Council of Skipton-on-Stour which, I understand, is dealing with several of its parishes separately. I am prepared to entertain an application from them for consent to a loan for the purpose.

Mr. De la Bère: May I ask my right hon. Friend whether he will realise the importance of the health and comfort of all the dwellers in the division of Evesham?

Mr. Macquisten: Have they ever considered the possibility of boring for water, as there is water under the surface everywhere?

DIPHTHERIA IMMUNISATION.

Mr. Leach: asked the Minister of Health whether he can supply a translation of the text of the recent French law regarding diphtheria immunisation?

Mr. Elliot: Yes, Sir. I am sending the hon. Member a translation of this law.

VOLUNTARY NURSING ASSOCIATIONS.

Mr. Day: asked the Minister of Health how many county or county borough councils have applied for his consent to subscribe to the maintenance of voluntary nursing associations, as provided for under Section 67 of the Poor Law Act, 1930, and the number of such councils that have failed to take advantage of this section?

Mr. Elliot: The relevant provision in Section 67 of the Poor Law Act, 1930, was replaced on 1st October, 1937, by Section 178 of the Public Health Act, 1936. My sanction is not required to expenditure under this section. The Public Health (London) Act, 1936, contains no similar provision and the London County Council subscribe to voluntary nursing associations with my consent under Section 67 of the Poor Law Act, 1930.

Mr. Day: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of the councils have adopted the provisions of the new Act?

Mr. Elliot: I am afraid that I cannot, because they do not need to have my Consent.

VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTORS ACT (YORKSHIRE).

Mr. Hepworth: asked the Minister of Health the number of applications he has received from Yorkshire as a whole and from Bradford, respectively, for pensions under the new Pensions (Voluntary Contributions) Act?

Mr. Elliot: I regret that the information asked for by my hon. Friend is not available, as applications for admission to the new voluntary pensions scheme are not arranged on a territorial basis.

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSING.

GROUND RENTS, ROAD CHARGES, ETC.

Mr. E. Smith: asked the Minister of Health (1) whether he is aware of the increasing practice of fixing ground-rent charges on the purchase of houses; and will he consider taking steps to deal with this problem;
(2) whether he is aware of the effect on house purchasers of ground rents, road charges, and the relatively high interest charges; and whether he will consider taking early legislative action to deal with this matter?

Mr. Elliot: The general question of the terms upon which house property is bought and sold is not a matter within the scope of my Department, but if the hon. Member wishes to bring to my notice any particular case arising under the Housing Acts I shall be glad to examine the matter.

Mr. Smith: The Ministry of Health are bound to be aware of the trend of events in connection with the issues raised in these questions. In view of the relatively high rate of interest charged by the companies, will the Minister consider action with a view to seeing that the burden on people who have purchased their houses is reduced?

Mr. Elliot: It is not actually within the scope of my Department, but if any case is brought to my notice I will examine it and do my best to advise the hon. Member.

Mr. Batey: Is this not one of the questions which ought to be brought within the scope of the right hon. Gentleman's Department?

Mr. J. Griffiths: asked the Minister of Health what steps have been taken to deal with the housing conditions in Carmarthenshire consequent upon the investigation made by his officers in the county last year?

Mr. Elliot: Most of the local authorities in the county are now taking active steps to remedy the unsatisfactory housing conditions reported upon by my inspectors, and I can assure the hon. Member that I am keeping in close touch with the local authorities in this matter.

Mr. Gallacher: Will the Minister promise to do better in Carmarthenshire than he did in Scotland?

Mr. J. Griffiths: I hope he will.

SMALL HOLDINGS.

Mr. De la Bère: asked the Minister of Health whether he will consider amending the Small Dwellings Acquisition Acts so as to cover, in addition, the purchase of small holdings on which houses could be erected by those who occupy and work on such holdings?

Mr. Elliot: The scope of the Small Dwellings Acquisition Acts is restricted to the acquisition of small houses but I understand that advances for the purchase of small holdings can already be obtained under Section 13 of the Small Holdings and Allotments Act, 1926. A person who had acquired a holding in this way could then apply for an advance for the erection of a house under Section 91 of the Housing Act, 1936.

Mr. De la Bère: Is this generally applicable to those who have spent years getting the land into good heart and are then dispossessed by those who have no sympathy with the holdings at all? Is it generally applicable?

Mr. Elliot: Generally applicable, yes.

Mr. Garro Jones: If a person wishes to purchase a holding upon which a house is already erected, will not the right hon. Gentleman make some provision for that?

Mr. Elliot: I do not think that that arises out of the question.

Mr. De la Bère: On a point of Order. I think that that does arise out of the question.

Mr. Elliot: The question says, "the purchase of small holdings on which houses could be erected."

Mr. De la Bère: Perhaps my right hon. Friend will let me put down another question?

GAS SUPPLY (LOCAL AUTHORITIES).

Mr. Porritt: asked the Minister of Health how many councils prohibit the use of gas in council houses to the cost of construction of which the State has contributed?

Mr. Elliot: I am unaware of any local authorities who prohibit the use of gas in their houses and in this connection I would draw attention to the terms of Section 27 of the Gas Undertakings Act, 1934, which makes it unlawful for a local authority to insert in any instrument in connection with the sale or letting of houses owned by them a provision restricting the right of the owner or occupier to take a supply of gas.

CHURCH SITES.

Mr. R. J. Russell: asked the Minister of Health the number of sites upon new housing areas sold by local authorities, during the last three years or other convenient date, for the erection thereon of places of worship?

Mr. Elliot: I regret that this information is not readily available in my Department, but if my hon. Friend has any particular area in mind, I shall be glad to look into the position.

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.

Mr. De Chair: asked the Minister of Health how many of the houses which have been built since 1931 have had to satisfy any test of architectural excellence as to design and durability, apart from the minimum requirements of cubic capacity?

Mr. Elliot: I am not aware what test my hon. Friend has in mind, but I believe that the great majority of houses built by rural district councils, in common with those of other local authorities, are of a good architectural standard. The responsibility for this, as for other qualifications, rests primarily on the local authorities concerned, but those not employing architects were requested in 1936 to submit plans to the Ministry, and this


request was repeated last April, both in the Housing Manual and in the accompanying circular, copies of which I am sending to my hon. Friend.

Mr. De Chair: Is my right hon. Friend aware that some 2,500,000 houses have sprung up like mushrooms during the last seven years without any apparent semblance of design at all, which will be a terrible sight in future.

MINERS' NYSTAGMUS (DEPART MENTAL COMMITTEE'S REPORT).

Mr. Batey: asked the Prime Minister whether the Government can now take steps to implement the report of the Departmental Committee which reported last January on miners' nystagmus, medical examinations and certificates, and also lump sum settlements?

The Prime Minister: The question of implementing some of the committee's recommendations will fall to be considered when the programme for next Session is being prepared, and I am not in a position to make any further statement now.

EX-MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT (PENSIONS).

Sir Assheton Pownall: asked the Prime Minister whether he can announce the decision of the Government with regard to the suggested pension scheme for ex-Members of this House?

The Prime Minister: The Government have had this matter under consideration, but it is not possible to deal with it at this stage of the Parliamentary Session. Further consideration will be given to the question during the Recess, and I hope to be in a position to make an announcement early in the autumn.

OLD AGE PENSIONS.

Mr. Lipson: asked the Minister of Health under what circumstances and for what reasons old age pensioners who are admitted into public assistance institutions are deprived of their pension; how many of them suffered this loss in the last recorded year; and the amount of saving to the Exchequer effected thereby?

Mr. Elliot: Under Section 23 of the Contributory Pensions Act, 1936, a pensioner who enters a public asisstance institution otherwise than for the purpose of receiving medical or surgical treatment, is disqualified for receiving pension so long as he remains in the institution. I regret that the information asked for in the second and third parts of the question is not available.

Mr. Lipson: Is my right hon. Friend aware that his answer discloses that a burden is at present imposed upon local authorities for the maintenance of these old age pensioners, and that if this discrimination were not made between two classes of old age pensioners entering a public institution, there would be available for the relief of the rates quite a considerable sum of money, besides the sum of pocket money given to old age pensioners?

Mr. Elliot: The House has decided in this way.

Mr. Messer: Does this apply to contributory old age pensions?

Mr. Gallacher: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the New Zealand Government provides pensions of £3 a week for a married couple and that the Isle of Man Government has set up a committee to consider the question of increasing old age pensions so as to allow 30s. per week for a married couple; and will he consider setting up a committee to go into the demand of the Old Age Pensioners Association for £1 per week for each person and 35s. per week for a married couple?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir John Simon): The hon. Member is apparently referring to a proposal which is under consideration in New Zealand and not to existing provision. I understand that the scheme differs widely in its proposed method of finance and in other ways from that in force in this country. A committee such as the hon. Member mentions has, I am informed, been set up in the Isle of Man. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Mr. Gallacher: In view of the progress made in New Zealand under a Labour Government and the work done in the Isle of Man, will the right hon. Gentleman


be prepared to receive a deputation on behalf of old age pensioners in order to state their case, or are we to take it that he is completely devoid of the bowels of compassion?

Lieut.-Commander Agnew: Are there any pensioners at all under a Communist Government?

Mr. Tinker: In view of the fact that there is undoubtedly great hardship amongst these old age pensioners, will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether it is worth while mentioning them in the next King's Speech.

Sir J. Simon: The question mentioned in the supplementary question has very often been put in this House, and I think the answers given from this bench must stand.

QUARRYMEN'S WAGES, CORNWALL.

Mr. Beechman: asked the Minister of Health whether he has now received from the Cornwall County Council a reply to his inquiries regarding the rates of wages paid to quarrymen in the employ of the council and, in particular, how the remuneration of quarrymen employed by the council compares with that received by other quarrymen in Cornwall; and whether he proposes taking further steps in the matter?

Mr. Elliot: No, Sir. A reply is expected after the meeting of the county council to be held this month.

ANGLO-GERMAN TRANSFER AGREEMENT.

Mr. Liddall: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the sinking fund provisions under the German debt arrangement will be operated by drawings at par or by purchase below par, or whether the sinking funds will be accumulated in sterling and used by Germany at an optional date to enable that Government to reopen discussion upon the German liability for Austrian debts?

Sir J. Simon: The sinking fund provision in regard to the Austrian guaranteed loans will continued to be governed by the terms of the general bonds. The detailed application of the sinking fund

provisions contained in the Anglo-German Transfer Agreement is at present under discussion, and an announcement will be made in due course. There is no question of discussion being reopened upon the German liability for Austrian debts.

CURRENCY (STABILISATION).

Mr. Moreing: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, as the result of their conversations with the Governments of France and the United States, it is the intention of His Majesty's Government to take steps to advance the question of stabilisation of the currency?

Sir J. Simon: No conversations of the character suggested have taken place, and I have nothing to add to previous statements on the subject referred to.

Mr. Moreing: In view of the present state of our trade, which largely depends on the stability of exchange which, again, depends on the stabilisation of the currency, will not the right hon. Gentleman move in this important matter?

Sir J. Simon: This is a matter which is constantly under the consideration of the authorities, and I do not agree that moving in the matter necessarily leads to stability.

DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEES (EVIDENCE, PUBLICATION).

Mr. Rhys Davies: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury upon whom it rests to decide whether the minutes of evidence submitted to Departmental and Inter-Departmental Committees shall be published or not?

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Captain Euan Wallace): The chairman of a committee may make representations to the Treasury that in his opinion it is essential that the evidence given before the committee should be published, and if he does so it then rests with the Treasury to decide whether publication should be authorised.

Mr. Davies: Has there ever been a case where the chairman of such a committee suggested publication and the Treasury refused?

Captain Wallace: I should require notice of that question.

FOODSTUFFS (CUSTOMS DUTIES).

Mr. Woods: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury the total amount of Customs Duty collected on foodstuffs for the financial year ended 31st March last?

Captain Wallace: The approximate amount of Customs duties collected during the financial year 1937–38 on foodstuffs, including tea, coffee, cocoa and certain foodstuffs which are used in part as feeding-stuffs for animals and cannot be separately distinguished was £40,000,000.

Mr. Woods: In view of the fact that such a large percentage of this duty is paid by parents of large families, making an additional burden upon them, will the Financial Secretary consider the possibility of making a remittance on a family basis?

Captain Wallace: That is a very much wider question than the one on the Order Paper.

TAXATION.

Mr. T. Henderson: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury the percentages of direct and indirect taxation from the year 1931–32 up to and including the present financial year?

Captain Wallace: With the hon. Member's permission I will circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the reply:

The percentages are as follow:



Direct.
Indirect.


1931–2
65·88
34·12


1932–3
61·00
39·00


1933–4
60·29
39·71


1934–5
59·82
40·18


1935–6
59·57
40·43


1936–7
59·71
40·29


1937–8
60·78*
39·22*


1938–9
63·03†
36·97†


*Approximate net receipts.


†Budget estimate.

POST OFFICE (EX-EMPLOYES ALLOWANCES).

Mr. A. V. Alexander: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he will consider the appointment of a committee of inquiry into the complaints submitted by the National Federation of Post Office Veterans regarding

pensions payable to Post Office servants who retired between 20th March, 1922, and 30th June, 1934?

Captain Wallace: I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to the answer which I gave on 19th July to the hon. Member for Dumbartonshire (Mr. Cassells). I can see no grounds which would justify the appointment of a committee of inquiry.

Oral Answers to Questions — AGRICULTURE.

WOOL PRICES.

Mr. Hepworth: asked the Minister of Agriculture the lowest and highest price of wool realised by the British farmer from this year's clip?

The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. W. S. Morrison): The price of wool varies considerably with the breed of sheep and the quality and condition of the wool. The highest recorded price of fleeces of washed wool this season at the country wool sales from which I have reports has been 15½d. per lb. for Southdown ewe wool, while the lowest has been 4¼d. per lb. for Scotch wool. My hon. Friend will appreciate that these prices relate to individual lots and cannot be taken as representative of the average prices ruling for the respective descriptions of wool.

Mr. Kirkwood: Is the Minister aware that Scottish wool is the finest wool in the world?

MILK.

Mr. Macquisten: asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is aware that the Milk Marketing Board last winter, while calling upon the private creamery manufacturers of butter and cheese to release large gallonages of milk for the liquid market to the extent of stopping all butter manufacture in some cases, were themselves in Cornwall still manufacturing butter, although there existed in that area a liquid milk rail-tanker despatch depot which could have handled and placed upon the London market the whole of this milk; and whether he will direct that in future the Milk Marketing Board shall not use their powers in a discriminating manner to further their own trading interests at the expense of those with whom they are in competition?

Mr. W. S. Morrison: I am aware that the Milk Marketing Board called upon creamery proprietors to divert supplies of


milk to better markets in accordance with the terms of the milk contract. I am informed by the board that milk was also diverted for the same purpose from the board's factories to an extent, in most cases, greater than in the case of the other creameries. It is true that in Cornwall there is a liquid despatch depot and that the board were manufacturing butter in that county, but the liquid requirements of the London market were met from sources nearer at hand, and it was unnecessary to draw further supplies from Cornwall, involving producers in heavy transport charges. The information available does not support the suggestion that the Milk Marketing Board have used their powers in a discriminating manner, but I would point out that the machinery of Section 9 of the Agricultural Marketing Act, 1931, is available for persons who desire to complain about the operation of a marketing scheme.

Mr. T. Williams: Is there any good reason why producers of milk should not market it themselves if they want to?

Mr. Morrison: I see no good reason why the producers of milk should not market their produce to the best advantage.

Mr. Macquisten: But are they not being stopped by the Milk Marketing Board?

Mr. Morrison: That is not the general feeling amongst producers.

Sir Reginald Clarry: asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is aware that the Milk Marketing Board last year opened several new creameries in areas already adequately equipped with creamery manufacturing facilities and, in order to get these redundant creameries into operation, compulsorily allocated supplies to them from producers whose milk had been bought and marketed previously by the existing creameries in the areas in question, thereby seriously damaging the creamery proprietors concerned; and whether he will instruct the Milk Marketing Board to cease using their powers for the destruction of private enterprise in this way during the coming milk-buying period?

Mr. Morrison: I am informed by the Milk Marketing Board that it is not the case that new factories have been established in areas already adequately

equipped with manufacturing facilities. In allocating supplies, the board are advised by a Joint Committee, consisting of representatives of the board and of the Central Milk Distributive Committee, and I understand that, in agreement with this committee, certain supplies were diverted from existing creameries to new factories belonging, not only to the board, but to other concerns as well. As to the last part of the question, I would ask my hon. Friend to take into account that the board are acting on behalf of the producers of the milk, and I may mention that the number of depots and factories owned otherwise than by the board has increased from 512 to 649 during the period of the scheme.

FEEDING-STUFFS.

Mr. De Chair: asked the Minister of Agriculture what steps he proposes to take to implement the Government's intention to stimulate the production of home-grown animal feeding-stuffs?

Mr. W. S. Morrison: I would refer my hon. Friend to my remarks during the Debate on 13th July.

Mr. De Chair: But is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that my question was put in order to get some information from him as to what he intends to do to supplement the remarks to which he has referred, which led us to expect further legislation to stimulate the home production of animal feeding-stuffs?

Mr. Morrison: In the Debate I referred to various measures taken to this end such as the Agricultural Act, the price insurance for cereals, oats and barley, and the subsidy for lime and slag. If the hon. Member will consider these remarks carefully in detail I think he will find the answer to his question.

Mr. De la Bère: May I ask what is hindering further progress in this matter now?

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT.

Mr. Davidson: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many of the recommendations of the recent Royal Commission on the economic or agricultural development of Scotland were put into effect?

The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Wedderburn): I am not aware of any recent Royal Commission on the subject.

Mr. Davidson: I have asked in my question about the last Royal Commission appointed to consider the economic and agricultural development of Scotland, and I want to know what recommendations of the Royal Commission were put into operation?

Mr. Wedderburn: The hon. Member's question does not say "the last Royal Commission" but "the recent Royal Commission." The last Royal Commission on the economic and agricultural development of Scotland was in 1892, and I understand that its proposals were not acceptable to Mr. Gladstone.

Mr. Davidson: Am I to take it that that was the Royal Commission to which the Prime Minister referred? The Under-Secretary has told us that there has been a reduction in agricultural production in Scotland and that there are less acres under cultivation—

Mr. Speaker: The hon. Member seems to be giving information.

Mr. Davidson: The Under-Secretary in his reply indicated that there was a reduction of 2,000 people engaged in agriculture in Scotland, and I was asking him in view of these facts whether a new Royal Commission was to be set up.

SOLICITORS (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1933.

Mr. Cassells: asked the Lord Advocate the number of prosecutions raised under the Solicitors (Scotland) Act, 1933, to the last convenient date; the penalties imposed in each case; and also the number of cases where complaints of the infringement of the Act were tendered to his Department but no prosecutions eventuated?

The Lord Advocate (Mr. T. M. Cooper): Since the Act came into force 12 cases of alleged contraventions have been reported, and in six of these cases proceedings were instituted. Five convictions were obtained, the penalties varying from an admonition to a fine of £5 with the alternative of 30 days' imprisonment.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.

Mr. Cassells: asked the Lord Advocate whether he is prepared to advise all clerks in the inferior criminal courts of

Scotland that, having regard to the terms of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1887, the Summary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Act, 1905, and the Circuit Courts and Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1925, no reference is to be made to previous convictions of an accused person until a conviction has been entered and sentence is about to be given?

The Lord Advocate: The circumstances in which reference may be made, or evidence led, with regard to previous convictions are the subject of detailed statutory provisions in the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1887, and the Summary Jurisdiction (Scotland) Act, 1908, and of numerous decisions in the High Court of Justiciary. I have no reason to suppose that the existing law and practice are not familiar to, and observed by, the clerks to the criminal courts in Scotland.

Mr. Cassells: Is the Lord Advocate aware that in the light of a recent decision many sheriff clerks in Scotland are in doubt as to what the present procedure ought to be, with the result that many of them are, in point of fact, prior to conviction, intimating to the court previous convictions? Therefore, in these circumstances is not the right hon. and learned Gentleman prepared to exercise his influence in connection with this matter, which is highly important?

The Lord Advocate: The recent decision to which the hon. and learned Gentleman refers merely applies a provision of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1908, and I am afraid that without further legislation no action could be taken to modify the effect of that decision.

NEWFOUNDLAND (BUDGET DEFICIT).

Mr. Creech Jones: asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs how much of the deficit of £260,000 announced on the Newfoundland budget is accounted for by expenditure on the airport in the island and why, having regard to the economic progress made under the first Commission Government, it is necessary to estimate for a deficit of as much as £800,000 for the year just begun?

The Vice-Chamberlain of the Household (Mr. Grimston): I have been asked to reply. The answer to the first part of the question of £50,000. As regards the


second part, the explanation lies partly in the business recession in the United States, the effects of which have been felt particularly in the newsprint industry, and partly in the special difficulties of the fishing industry arising from the imposition of very heavy taxes in Brazil, Newfoundland's largest market for codfish. This combination of circumstances has made it necessary for the Commission of Government to estimate revenue at a somewhat lower figure than the very high level reached in the financial year which has just ended, and also to provide, £200,000 for a special short-term programme designed to stimulate employment both in the fisheries and in other directions. The Commission will at the same time proceed with their long-term programme of reconstruction, and over £280,000 has been provided in the Newfoundland budget for this purpose. The position is explained in detail in the recent Budget speech of the Commissioner for Finance, and my Noble Friend will arrange for copies of the speech to be placed in the Library of the House as soon as prints are available.

KENYA AND UGANDA.

Mr. de Rothschild: asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has approved the regulations now being adopted in Kenya and Uganda requiring natives to obtain the permission of the director of education before proceeding outside these colonies for the purpose of education; what are the grounds upon which these regulations have been instituted; and how many applications for permission to leave the colonies for educational purposes have been made in the last six months and how many have been refused?

Captain Dugdale (Lord of the Treasury): I have been asked to reply. It is not clear to what particular regulations the hon. Member is referring. But if he will supply further details regarding what he has in mind, my right hon. Friend will certainly look into the matter.

Mr. de Rothschild: asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the prosecution, in the second-class court at Kiambu, Kenya, in January of this year,

of Parmenas Kangara, for contravention of an order made by the director of education that Mukui school should be closed; what were the grounds upon which such order was made; whether any State school is available to the 300 pupils formerly attending Mukui school; how many similar orders have been made in the past year; and whether in each case a State school is available for the pupils displaced?

Captain Dugdale: The Governor of Kenya reported in July last that it had been necessary to prosecute the managers and teachers of this school, but my right hon. Friend has no information of a further prosecution in January. The order for this school to be closed was made because it had been opened in defiance of the authority of the Local Native Council. There is a Mission School within a mile of the site of this school. During 1937 orders were issued for the closing of six other independent African schools; but, on a written undertaking being given that the managers of five of these schools would co-operate with the Department of Education and would conform to the Departmental syllabus, permission was given for them to be reopened. My right hon. Friend has no information on the question whether another school was available for the pupils of the school which remained closed.

BECHUANALAND (SLAVERY).

Mr. Riley: asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether he has any information regarding the existence of more than 10,000 slaves within the Bechuanaland Protectorate; and what is being done to terminate such slavery in British territory?

Mr. Grimston: I presume that the hon. Member is referring to the Masarwa. I would call his attention to the reply given on this subject to the hon. Member for Shipley (Mr. Creech Jones) by my Noble Friend on 12th July.

Mr. Riley: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that a report has recently been published, by a man on the spot, which mentions the existence of this state of slavery? If I send the hon. Gentleman a copy, will he make inquiries?

Mr. Grimston: I think that if the hon. Member will refer to the answer I have given, he will see that it contains a good deal about the report to which he refers.

AIR MINISTRY (PUBLICITY OFFICER).

Mr. Jagger: asked the Secretary of State for Air how a publicity officer, recently appointed to his Department, was appointed; and whether the appointment w as made as a result of open competition and was duly advertised?

The Under-Secretary of State for Air (Captain Harold Balfour): The appointment of a deputy Press and publicity officer was made last January after advertisement and on the recommendation of a selection board. A further more junior and temporary appointment of a publicity officer was made in April of this year from the list of candidates who had applied in response to the advertisement which appeared in the public Press in respect of the first appointment.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. Attlee: May I ask the Prime Minister what will be the business for next week; and also what other Government business, other than Supply, it is proposed to take to-night?

The Prime Minister: The business for next week will be as follows:

Monday: Supply; Committee (19th Allotted Day). The Mines Department Vote will be considered. Ways and Means, Committee.

Tuesday: Supply; Report (20th Allotted Day). The Foreign Office Vote

will be considered. Ways and Means, Report.

Wednesday: Consolidated Fund (Appropriation) Bill, Second Reading. Matters relating to the Home Office will be debated.

Thursday: Consolidated Fund (Appropriation) Bill, remaining stages. Health Administration will be considered.

At Ten o'clock on Monday and on Tuesday, the Committee and Report stages respectively of all outstanding Supply Votes will be put from the Chair.

During the week outstanding business will be dealt with, including the Lords Amendments to the Fire Brigades Bill, the Bacon Industry Bill and to any other Bills which have already been passed by this House.

If all necessary business has been disposed of, it is hoped to take the Motion for the Summer Adjournment on Friday, 29th July. The proposed date of reassembly in the autumn will be announced next week.

For to-night, we propose to suspend the Eleven o'Clock Rule in order to obtain the Third and Fourth Orders on the Paper.

Sir Percy Harris: Will the Prime Minister himself take the Foreign Office Vote on Tuesday?

The Prime Minister: indicated assent.

Motion made, and Question put,
That this day, notwithstanding anything in Standing Order No. 14, Business other than the Business of Supply may be taken before Eleven of the clock, and that the Proceedings on Government Business be exempted, at this day's sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—[The Prime Minister.]

The House divided: Ayes, 231; Noes, 107.

Division No. 312.]
AYES.
[3.47 p.m.


Acland, R. T. D. (Barnstaple)
Beauchamp, Sir B. C.
Carver, Major W. H.


Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.
Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h)
Cary, R. A.


Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)
Beeohman, N. A.
Cayzer, Sir H. R. (Portsmouth, S.)


Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.
Bennett, Sir E. N.
Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)


Albery, Sir Irving
Blair, Sir R.
Cazalet, Capt. V. A. (Chippenham)


Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)
Boulton, W. W.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. N. (Edgb't'n)


Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh)
Boyce, H. Leslie
Channon, H.


Anderton, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (So'h Univ's)
Brass, Sir W.
Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)


Anstruther-Gray, W. J.
Brown, Col. D. C. (Hexham)
Chapman, Sir S. (Edinburgh, S.)


Aske, Sir R. W.
Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)
Chorlton, A. E. L.


Assheton, R.
Bull, B. B.
Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)


Astor, Hon. W. W. (Fulham, E.)
Bullock, Capt. M.
Clarry, Sir Reginald


Baillie, Sir A. W. M.
Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.
Cobb, Captain E. C. (Preston)


Balfour, Capt. H. H. (lsle of Thanet)
Burton, Col. H. W.
Colville, Rt. Hon. John


Balniel, Lord
Butcher, H. W.
Conant, Captain R. J. E.


Barclay-Harvey, Sir C. M.
Butler, R. A.
Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)


Barrie, Sir C. C.
Campbell, Sir E. T.
Courthope, Col. Rt. Hon. Sir G. L.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Cartland, J. R. H.
Cox, H. B. Trevor




Crooke, Sir J, Smedley
Hunter, T.
Ropner, Colonel L.


Crookshank, Capt. H. F. C.
Hurd, Sir P. A.
Ross, Major Sir R. D. (Londonderry)


Cross, R. H.
Hutchinson, G. C.
Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)


Crowder, J. F. F.
James, Wing-commander A. W. H.
Rothschild, J. A. de


Culverwell, C. T.
Joel, D. J. B.
Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.


Davidson, Viscountess
Jones, L. (Swansea W.)
Russell, Sir Alexander


De Chair, S. S.
Kerr, Colonel C. I. (Montrose)
Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)


De la Bère, R.
Kerr, J. Graham (Soottish Univs.)
Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen)


Denman, Hon. R. D.
Knox, Major-General Sir A. W. F.
Salmon, Sir I.


Doland, G. F.
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Salt, E. W.


Dower, Major A. V. G.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Samuel, M. R. A.


Duckworth, W. R. (Moss Side)
Lewis, O.
Scott, Lord William


Dugdale, Captain T. L.
Liddall, W. S.
Seely, Sir H. M.


Duggan, H. J.
Lindsay, K. M.
Selley, H. R.


Dunean, J. A. L.
Lipson, D. L.
Shakespeare, G. H.


Eastwood, J. F.
Lloyd, G. W.
Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)


Eden, Rt. Hon. A.
Loftus, P. C.
Shepperson, Sir E. W.


Edmondson, Major Sir J.
Lyons, A. M.
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir J. A.


Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E,
Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)
Sinclair, Rt. Hon. Sir A. (C'thn's)


Ellis, Sir G.
MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G.
Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.


Elliston, Capl. G. S.
McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.
Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)


Elmley, Viscount
McKie, J. H.
Smith, Sir Louis (Hallam)


Emery, J. F.
Macquisten, F. A.
Smithers, Sir W.


Emmott, C. E. G. C.
Magnay, T.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Emrys-Evans, P. V.
Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest
Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.


Entwistle, Sir C. F.
Mander, G. le M.
Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'ld)


Errington, E.
Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon H. D. R.
Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)


Evans, D. O. (Cardigan)
Markham, S. F.
Storey, S.


Everard, W. L.
Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.
Strauss, E. A. (Southwark, N.)


Findlay, Sir E.
Meller, Sir R. J. (Mltcham)
Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)


Fleming, E. L.
Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Fox, Sir G. W. G.
Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Sir M. F.


Fremantle, Sir F. E.
Moore, Lieut.-Col. Sir T. C. R.
Thomas, J. P. L.


George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey)
Moreing, A. C.
Thomson, Sir J. D. W.


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir J.
Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)
Titchfield, Marquess of


Glyn, Major Sir R. G. C.
Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)
Train, Sir J.


Goldie, N. B.
Muirhead, Lt.-Col. A, J.
Tryon, Major Rt. Hon. G. C.


Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Munro, P.
Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L.


Grigg, Sir E. W. M.
Nail, Sir J.
Wakefield, W. W.


Grimston, R. V.
Nicholson, G. (Farnham)
Walker-Smith, Sir J.


Guest, Hon. I. (Brecon and Radnor)
Nicolson, Hon. H. G.
Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan


Guinness, T. L. E. B.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)


Hambro, A. V.
Owen, Major G.
Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)


Hannah, I. C.
Palmer, G. E. H.
Wardlaw-Milne, Sir J. S.


Harris, Sir P. A.
Peake, O.
Warrender, Sir V.


Harvey, Sir G.
Perkins, W. R. D.
Waterhouse, Captain C.


Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)
Porritt, R. W.
Watt, Major G. S. Harvie


Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)
Pownall, Lt.-Col. Sir Assheton
Wedderburn, H. J. S.


Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.
Procter, Major H. A.
Wells, Sir Sydney


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A, P.
Raikes, H. V. A. M.
Williams, C. (Torquay)


Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-
Ramsden, Sir E.
Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)


Hepworth, J.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.


Herbert, Major J. A. (Monmouth)
Rayner, Major R. H.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Hoare, Rt. Hon. Sir S.
Reed, A. C. (Exeter)
Wise, A. R.


Holmes, J. S.
Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)
Womersley, Sir W. J.


Horsbrugh, Florenco
Reid, W. Allan (Derby)
Wright, Wing-Commander J. A. C.


Howitt, Dr. A. B.
Remer, J. R.
Young, A. S. L. (Partick)


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)
Rickards, G. W. (Skipton)



Hudson, Rt. Hon. R. S. (Southport)
Roberts, W. (Cumberland, N.)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hulbert, N. J.
Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)
Captain Hope and Mr. Furness




NOES.


Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)
Day, H.
Hopkin, D.


Adamson, W. M.
Dobbie, W.
Jagger, J.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)
Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)
Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)


Ammon, C. G.
Ede, J. C.
Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.


Anderson, F. (Whitehaven)
Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)
Jones, A. C. (Shipley)


Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.
Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Banfield, J. W.
Gallacher, W.
Kelly, W. T.


Barnes, A. J.
Garro Jones, G. M.
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.


Barr, J.
Gibson, R. (Greenock)
Kirby, B. V.


Batey, J.
Green, W. H. (Deptford)
Kirkwood, D.


Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.


Broad, F. A.
Grenfell, D. R.
Lathan, G.


Brown, C. (Mansfield)
Griffiths, G. A. (Hemsworth)
Leach, W.


Buchanan, G.
Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)
Leonard, W.


Burke, W. A.
Guest, Dr. L H. (lslingten, N.)
Leslie, J. R.


Cassells, T.
Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)
Lunn, W.


Cluse, W. S.
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Macdonald, G. (Ince)


Cove, W. G.
Hardie, Agnes
McEntee, V. La T.


Daggar, G.
Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)
MoGhee, H. G.


Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)
Henderson, J. (Ardwick)
MoGovern, J.


Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton)
Henderson, T. (Tradeston)
MacLaren, A.


Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)
Hills, A. (Pontefract)
Maclean, N.







Maxton, J.
Riley, B.
Tinker, J. J.


Messer, F.
Ritson, J.
Tomlinson, G.


Milner, Major J.
Sanders, W. S.
Viant, S. P.


Montague, F.
Short, A.
Walker, J.


Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
Silkin, L,
Watkins, F. C.


Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Simpson, F. B.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. J. C.


Muff, G.
Smith, E. (Stoke)
Westwood, J.


Noel-Baker, P. J.
Smith, T. (Normanton)
Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)


Paling, W.
Sorensen, R. W.
Williams, T. (Don Valley)


Parker, J.
Stephen, C.
Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)


Pearson, A.
Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)
Young, Sir R. (Newton)


Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Strauss, G. R. (Lambeth, N.)



Poole, C. C.
Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Pritt, D. N.
Thorne, W.
Mr. Groves and Mr. Mathers.


Quibell, D. J. K.
Thurtle, E.

PRIVATE BILLS (GROUP L).

Leave given to the Committee on Group L of Private Bills to make a Special Report relative to the West Yorkshire Gas Distribution Bill [Lords].

Special Report brought up, and read; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

BILLS REPORTED.

WEST YORKSHIRE GAS DISTRIBUTION BILL [Lords].

Reported, with Amendments (with Report on the Bill).

Bill, as amended, and Report to lie upon the Table; Report to be printed.

TATTON ESTATE BILL [Lords].

Reported, without Amendment, from the Committee on Unopposed Bills; to be read the Third time.

PENZANCE CORPORATION BILL [Lords].

Reported, with Amendments, from the Committee on Unopposed Bills (with Report on the Bill).

Bill, as amended, and Report to lie upon the Table; Report to be printed.

SALFORD CORPORATION BILL [Lords].

Reported, with Amendments [Title amended], from the Committee on Unopposed Bills (with Report on the Bill).

Bill, as amended, and Report to lie upon the Table; Report to be printed.

COLLECTING CHARITIES (REGULATION) BILL [Lords].

Report from the Joint Committee, with Minutes of Evidence, in respect of the Collecting Charities (Regulation) Bill [Lords] (pending in the Lords), brought up, and read;

Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to,—

Imperial Telegraphs Bill,
Chimney Sweepers Acts (Repeal) Bill,
Ipswich Corporation (Trolley Vehicles) Provisional Order Bill,
Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation (Trolley Vehicles) Provisional Order Bill,
West Midlands Joint Electricity Authority Provisional Order Bill,
Pier and Harbour Provisional Order (Plymouth) Bill, without Amendment.

Amendments to—

Food and Drugs Bill [Lords], without Amendment.

Guildford Corporation Bill, with Amendments.

That they communicate that they have come to the following Resolution relative to the Ministry of Health Provisional Order (Mid-Staffordshire Joint Hospital District) Bill, namely:

"That leave be given to suspend any further proceedings, in order to proceed with the Bill in the next Session of Parliament, provided that all fees due thereon up to this day be paid:

That a copy of such Bill shall be deposited in the Office of the Clerk of the Parliaments not later than Three o'clock on or before the third day on which the House shall sit after the next meeting of Parliament, with a declaration annexed thereto, certified under the seal of the Minister of Health and stating that the Bill is the same in every respect as the Bill at the last stage of the proceedings thereon in this House in the present Session:

That the proceedings on such Bill shall be pro forma only in regard to every stage through which the same


shall have passed in the present Session, and that no new fees be charged in regard to such stages:

That the Standing Orders by which the proceedings on Bills are regulated shall not apply to such Bill in regard to any of the stages through which the same shall have passed during the present Session:

That all petitions presented in the present Session against the Bill shall stand referred to the Committee on the same Bill in the next Session of Parliament."

Orders of the Day — SUPPLY.

[18TH ALLOTTED DAY.]

Considered in Committee.

[Sir DENNIS HERBERT in the Chair.]

CIVIL ESTIMATES, 1938.

CLASS IV.

PUBLIC EDUCATION, SCOTLAND.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £4,693,527, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1939, for public education in Scotland, and for the Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh, including sundry grants in aid."—[NOTE: £3,200,000 has been voted on account.]

3.58 p.m.

The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Wedderburn): We spent yesterday discussing the Vote for the Department of Health for Scotland. We have to-day three separate Votes to consider, namely the Education Vote, the Scottish Office Vote, and the Law Charges Vote. This Education Vote, which we are taking first, is one which has not been discussed in the House for some time—I think not for the last two years. This, no doubt, is due to the fact that the major event in the educational programme during that period was the Education Act, passed in 1936, and the principal matter of interest since then has been the consideration of the steps to be taken to prepare for the implementing of the Act in 1939. Other matters of major interest which impinged to a certain extent upon educational policy, such as physical training and the provision of milk, have been discussed separately on other occasions.
This is an Estimate for £7,900,000. That represents an increase of about £164,000 over last year. This estimated expenditure, as the Committee will see from the Estimates, falls under four main heads—administration, inspection, grants-in-aid, and the provision for the Royal Scottish Museum. The first provides for organisation, the second for observation and report, the third supplies the main sums of money which are necessary to enable education to be carried on by local authorities, and the fourth illustrates

Scottish history and achievement. The gross total is about £8,700,000, and against this there is set an appropriation-in-aid of about £789,000. The first two items together, administration and inspection, add up to about £132,000, showing an increase of £4,000 over last year, and that increase is mainly due to the expansion of educational work both at the head office and in the inspectorate in preparation for the higher school-leaving age.
Perhaps, in order to show the modem spirit in which we are recruiting our inspectorate, I might mention that in the last nine years we have appointed 15 specialists in such practical subjects as engineering, commercial subjects, art, handwork, rural science, physical training and domestic science. In addition to the technical qualifications and teaching experience which are required in the work of school inspection, several of these specialists have had first-hand experience of the practice of their craft under ordinary conditions of employment in industry or in commerce. Until 1930 the only women who found a place in the school inspectorate were three inspectresses of domestic science, but before the end of this year we shall have in all 13 women inspectors, including five for domestic science.
The Museum expenditure, a small item of about £28,000, shows an increase of £1,000, and here I ought to mention that the number of visitors to the Museum has increased from 592,000 to 654,000 in the year under review. These three heads between them account for only about 2 per cent. of the total sum of money for which we are now asking. The main bulk of the Vote is under the third head, that is, grants-in-aid, which includes £7,443,000 for the general aid grant and £1,078,000 for superannuation of teachers. Together these form 98 per cent. of the total. As hon. Members are aware, the greater part of the general aid grant and the whole of the superannuation grant are determined by the 11/80ths formula, and are thus automatically determined by the English grants, which are based on the English expenditure. The money voted under these heads is paid into the Education (Scotland) Fund. That fund is used in the first place to provide grants for 11 central institutions, that is, technical colleges, the colleges for art, commerce and domestic subjects; the seven centres and colleges for the training of teachers;


and 16 secondary schools which are not under education authorities; the large expenditure on superannuation allowances for teachers, the expenses of the leaving certificate examination, and other miscellaneous charges—a total of about £1,500,000. The balance of about £7,000,000 is divided among the 35 educational authorities according to block grant formula which is submitted annually to Parliament— £4 18s. 4d. in respect of each scholar, £119 5s. in respect of each teacher, with an adjustment for the rateable value of each area. The regulations which are proposed for the present year have now been laid before both Houses of Parliament and they have proved acceptable to the majority of the education authorities.
Any particular points on the Estimates—there are a great number that might possibly be raised—will be replied to by my right hon. Friend. I should like to turn, in commending these Estimates, to one or two general considerations. First of all I want to give some account of how we are progressing in preparation for the 1st September, 1939, when, in pursuance of the Education Act which was passed two years ago, the school-leaving age will be raised to 15.

Mr. Cove: For some of them.

Mr. Wedderburn: Yes, there will be exemptions. We have made a great many comprehensive inquiries, which give us every reason to think that the year 1939–40 will find the education authorities generally prepared to make effective educational provision for the large proportion of children between the ages of 14 and 15 who will continue at school under the new arrangement. The main source of difficulty at present is the provision of new accommodation, because there is a great deal to be clone in bringing our accommodation up to the mark even if we did not have to enlarge it for the purpose of taking on new scholars. But in general we think that the education authorities will by that date be in a position to make effective provision for the additional number of children who will remain at school. All the 35 education authorities have already submitted their schemes to the Department and 33 of these schemes have been approved.
I do not want to take up too much time, but it might interest the Committee if I gave one illustration from a rural and semi-rural county and another from a city, to show the kind of schemes which are being prepared. In the rural and semi-rural county that I select there are at present 64 schools—I am speaking of Midlothian—ranging in size from eight pupils to 900 pupils, and providing altogether for a total of about 15,000 pupils. The education authority does not think that when the leaving age is raised the total number of pupils to be provided for will be any greater than it is at present, and this expectation agrees with the general forecast for Scotland which the Department has received from the Government Actuary. The decline in the birthrate is the explanation of that. In 1913–14 the births in Scotland were 122,000; in 1920–21 they were 126,000; and in 1936–37 they were 88,000. But obviously there must be some reorganisation, some improvement of curriculum, some additional accommodation for practical work and physical education, some increase in teaching staff, if the additional year at school is to be made worth while. I am sure we must all agree that it should be made worth while.
It should also be noted that relatively greater numbers of pupils will be in the higher blocks than in the lower—again because of the steady decline in the birthrate. In the area I am considering the schools at present fall into four well-defined categories: firstly, four central schools providing a leaving certificate course of five or six years; secondly, 16 central schools providing an advanced division course of two or three years—both these groups of schools are fed from surrounding schools by pupils transferred at the age of 12 or thereby—thirdly, 11 self-contained schools providing advanced division courses for their own pupils only; and, fourthly, schools which carry pupils only up to the age of 12 and then pass them on to the central schools, aiding them, where it is necessary or appropriate, by bursaries and travelling facilities.
But the authority propose to carry centralisation a little further, so that in 1940 there will be in this area 19 central schools—of which four will be of the five-year type of secondary education—is of the three-year type with various forms of curriculum; one self-contained


school with a three-year secondary course; and 43 junior schools doing primary work only. They propose to add 36 rooms for practical work and 13 gymnasia and halls for physical education. Some of these things are necessitated by the higher leaving age. Others would in any case be provided as part of the normal development resulting from increased attention to practical work and physical well-being. The staff of 544 will be increased by i6 teachers of various kinds, and, with this increase and reorganised provision already existing, children over 12 will have an opportunity for a sound course of secondary education in one or other of its various appropriate ofrms and in three-year courses or five-year courses, as the case may be, according to their probable leaving age.
But I would like to say that in respect of rural areas the Department have sounded a warning note about the danger of over-centralisation. Let me quote one short passage from the circular which we issued to the authorities on the subject of educational schemes:
In many cases the authority will no doubt consider it expedient on grounds of educational efficiency as well as for the sake of economy, to provide post-primary education at central schools to which children will proceed after completing the primary course at other schools in the neighbourhood. This will clearly be an appropriate method in urban areas. The Department would, however, remind education authorities responsible for rural areas of the wider considerations which such a policy involves in their case. Long distance transport of young children brings its own problems and difficulties, as does also housing in lodgings and hostels. The social and intellectual life of a village may be impoverished by the removal of the older children and the more highy qualified teachers, Even on purely educational grounds the centralisation of the instruction of children from rural districts in burgh schools does not always furnish a suitable solution. A smaller degree of centralisation in suitable rural centres with a curriculum appropriate to the local conditions may often prove the better course. The possibilities of that individual attention which, in the tradition of Scotland, gifted pupils have received from devoted teachers in small country schools should not be forgotten.
I think that is wise. We do not want mechanical centralisation inspired only by motives of economy or by too narrow a view of educational efficiency that would ignore certain important human factors and would fail to take proper account of rural interests and occupations.
In the case of the cities, if I take as an example the City of Edinburgh, the process of the centralisation of post-primary education is already far advanced. Primary schools have been formed into groups which link to a central school in which pupils follow a well-organised three-year or five-year course of secondary education. By the time the school-leaving age is raised at the end of next year, it is expected that in this area there will be nine schools providing three-year secondary courses and six schools providing five-year courses. The building programmes for this area include 20 new or enlarged schools at an estimated cost of £700,000.

Mr. Buchanan: For the whole of Scotland?

Mr. Wedderburn: No. I am giving an example just to show the kind of schemes that are being prepared. But not all of this programme is due simply to the raising of the school leaving age. Some of it is rendered necessary by the movement of population, by the call for schools in the new housing areas, where the population are to some extent shifting, and by the need, in many areas the very pressing need, of replacing unsatisfactory and out-of-date buildings. When the programme is completed there will be an addition of 3,300 to the number of places in the secondary schools.
The pattern in which the education arrangements will be shaped under the provisions of the 1936 Act may be outlined as follows: Nursery schools for children from two to five years of age, infant division from five to seven, primary division from seven to twelve, and thereafter, a wide variety of secondary courses, in the first place determined by the probable length of post-primary school life—three years or five years as the case may be—and in the second place taking various shapes which may be either literary, technical, commercial, domestic, or rural, according to the aptitude and the interests of the pupil and the character of the locality in which he lives.
I would like to say one or two brief words about the progress that is being made in the provision of nursery schools, as I know that many hon. Members are particularly anxious that progress there should be accelerated. The development of nursery schools was one of the features


of our educational programme in 1935, and after recapitulating certain general considerations about accommodation, planning, equipment, and so on, the Department suggested that all education authorities should make a careful survey of the nursery school requirements in their own areas with a view to submitting practical proposals to the Department. On 31st July, last year there had been established altogether 28 nursery schools in Scotland, with a total attendance of 1,067, as compared with 25 schools and an enrolment of 947 in the preceding year. The number has now increased to 31 schools, and I would add that the Glasgow education authority is proposing now to erect 10 nursery schools, and many of the other authorities have in hand schemes for their districts.
There is another point with which I want to deal, a point which I think is of importance.

Mr. Henderson Stewart: Is anything equivalent to nursery schools being considered for the rural districts, where the normal nursery school is not a feasible proposal?

Mr. Wedderburn: I think it depends on the density of population; I think that is the only consideration. It is our aim that the three-year secondary courses designed for those who leave school at the age of 15 should be in their various types—technical, or literary, or whatever it may be—just as well housed, as suitably staffed, as properly planned, and as atractive to parents, to pupils, and to employers, as are the older secondary schools. We want very much to avoid any suggestion that there is any inferiority in educational and social value or any other such distinction between what used to be called the three-year higher grade school and the three-year advanced division school. I would remind the Committee of some observations which were made by my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Advocate when the Education Bill was before the Scottish Grand Committee in 1936. He said then that our object was to raise the status of the three-year advanced division courses and to secure that the distinction between the curricula of the three-year courses and the full five-year secondary courses should be made only on educational grounds; and he pointed out that in the

two types of school the scale of Government grant is the same, so much for each pupil and so much for each teacher without distinction, and that, as regards buildings and equipment, not only is there no distinction, but the advanced division buildings are in many cases definitely superior to those of the older secondary schools, and that, as regards the size of classes, the same general rule holds good for corresponding age groups.
In 1936 the average class in the advanced division school was 29, and the average class in the secondary school during the first three years of the curriculum was 28; and the figures are very much the same to-day. If anybody doubts that these aims are being realised, they should visit some of the new advanved division schools which are being built in many of the education areas, both in the towns and in the country. I do not want to cite particular examples, because that would be invidious, but there is no doubt that these schools are models of their own kind and need not fear comparison from any quarter, either at borne or abroad. I might perhaps mention one other point which has been emphasised by some of our inspectors in the course of the Department's inquiries on this point. They report that prejudice against the advanced division sometimes arises because parents find that employers are more willing to give jobs to young people who have attended the academic course of a secondary school for two or three years than to those who have completed an advanced division course of similar length, and it is our hope that employers and parents will become increasingly aware of the real value of the newer type of schools and the more modern forms of instruction that they provide.
I would just say one or two words on the topic of physical education. Considerable progress has been made since the circular which we issued on the subject in 1936. School building proposals between 1936 and June of this year have included 205 new halls and gymnasia, seven new swimming ponds, and 54 playing fields, and in many cases the improvement of existing playgrounds. Continuation classes in various forms of physical education are continuing to expand, and the number of students has increased from 20,801 in 1934 to 27,067 in 1936–37. One of the chief reasons for the increase is


the success of what are known as "Keep fit" classes, chiefly for women, in which I am informed that a popular type of rhythmic exercises is taught. Nine authorities have appointed county organisers, while in 11 other areas, where the distribution of population creates special problems, special arrangements have been made under which the services of specialist visiting teachers are being made more widely available. During the past two years the number of specialist teachers of physical education employed in Scotland has risen from 476 to 547. In addition no fewer than 5,000 class teachers have attended refresher courses in physical training in recent years. A syllabus of "Schemes of physical training in one-teacher and other small schools" has been published by the Department for the guidance of teachers in small schools, who have to handle classes of a wide age-range and for whom the ordinary syllabus is not entirely suitable.
I think I ought to say a few words about the cordial co-operation which exists between local education authorities and their directors on the one hand and the Department's officials and inspectors on the other, and I think the Committee will agree that that is one of the most valuable features of Scottish education. The education authorities, either individually or through their associations, are kept closely in touch with all proposals for any Bills or any regulations, codes, circulars, or other instruments of administrative action, and the directors of education are in continual contact with our own administrative and inspecting officers. There is far more informal contact between the centre and the localities than there used to be in the old days, partly because the Secretary of the Department and nearly all of our administrative staff are now stationed in Edinburgh, partly because the Department fully recognises the importance and the efficiency of the great county authorities who now administer education in the localities, and partly because, under the modern block-grant arrangement, a large measure of liberty is left to the local administrators and to the teachers in matters of detail.
I would like to quote, in conclusion, a few sentences from the reports of the chief inspectors which were published last year, and in doing so I would like to point out that of these four officers, three are due

to retire this autumn after long and arduous service in the cause of education in Scotland. One of them was honoured last year by His Majesty with a C.B.E., and another has received the degree of LL.D. from his own University. These men have seen Scottish education from very close quarters for many years in a more intimate way than most people could ever hope to achieve, and they are at an age which is free from illusions, but they speak well of our educational system and of the great advances that have taken place within their own lifetime. Here are three extracts:
I find no signs of stagnation or complacency.

Mr. Maxton: Who is it?

Mr. Wedderburn: I have the names here.

Mr. Maxton: That is the point. The hon. Gentleman is paying a tribute to entirely anonymous persons, and why should they not have their names mentioned and recognised?

Mr. Wedderburn: It is in their capacity as inspectors of education of long standing rather than in their individual capacity that I am quoting them:
I find no signs of stagnation or complacency; certain weaknesses have been noted, but there is ample evidence of energy and movement. A healthy spirit of inquiry, an interest in trial and experiment, a zest for new things are abroad, and from them is bound to issue some ultimate good.
There are firm grounds for hope; the great mass of our teachers are well educated, well trained and zealous; the modern child is happy at school; the content of education is steadily growing in reality; increased stress is laid on essential things like health; and, best sign of all, there is a readiness to admit that our system is not perfect and, along with this, an earnest desire to mend the flaws.
It is a pleasure to remark that, though some of my colleagues survey the educational scene with a severely critical eye, not one of them has sounded a note of pessimism or despondency. The general impression is rather that we are holding fast to what is good and precious in the present system and at the same time adopting in practice whatever changes and modifications have won the approval of earnest and thoughtful minds.

4.31 p.m.

Mr. Westwood: I beg to move, to reduce the Vote by £100.
The Vote we are now discussing concerns one of the most important parts of


Scottish administration which we can discuss, because it deals with the education of a race that has a particular love for education, and which for a long time claimed to be in advance of England. I am afraid, however, that England has made rapid strides, and that unless we do something more than we are doing we are likely to lag behind England. Reference has been made to the better type of schools, that are now being provided by the education authorities. May I suggest that it would have been a wise thing for the Department to have a complete survey of the schools in Scotland so that we would know exactly where are the really bad schools which ought to be rebuilt and reconditioned. That suggestion has been made before, but I do not know whether effect has been given to it or whether, as in England, there are black-listed schools on which we should concentrate with a view to getting school habitations for our children without which it is impossible to provide them with decent education. Reference has been made by the Under-Secretary to the increased number of playgrounds. There is a need not only for an increased number but for new outlook in providing playgrounds. The wrong type is provided. It is far too small in most cases, and instead of being a green belt round the school, it is more like a black band, and I suggest that if we had more green belts instead of black bands round our schools, they would look like places of health instead of places of mourning. I suggest, also, that playgrounds are cheaper to provide than policemen and better than prisons, and that an increase of the first will reduce the need for the latter.
With regard to school health services, it is well known to those who have been dealing with education administration that when the school health service was inaugurated it was believed that it would become one of the main preventive health services. With some knowledge of Scottish administration I think it can be claimed that to a considerable extent it has fulfilled its early promise. Experience has shown, however, that the main functions of our health service in the schools has not been to prevent the diseases and illnesses of children, but to discover and to remedy developed defects which might give rise to troubles in later life. The usual arrangement is that the children are medically examined as a

routine measure three times during school life—at entry, age five or thereby, at age nine, and before leaving school, about age 13. May I suggest that now that the health and education authorities are the same body, except in the large burghs which are not cities, age five has now no particular significance as regards the health services for children and that it ought to be possible to use to better advantage those who are engaged on school health services.
The question which arises is whether a better service can be provided for preschool children without adding to the costs of county and town councils and without detracting from the value of the school medical service. The three parts of the routine medical examination during school life could easily be cut down to two, which might take place at age seven and at 13. This would release some of our medical staff for that pre-school medical examination which I have suggested, and it would give us a more effective service in discovering defects that ought to be remedied before the children enter school. It could be carried through at very little more, if any more cost to the local authority. For three years I sat on the Departmental Committee which inquired into the health services of Scotland. On page 17 of our report, which contains the summary of our decisions, there is a paragraph dealing with school health services which says:
The school health service has materially contributed to the improvement of the health of the school children; but it is prevented by legal and other restrictions from achieving its full possibilities. The health service should exercise a continuous supervision of the health of school children and the health and education services should collaborate in choosing the sites and planning and construction of school buildings, provision of playing-fields and other facilities for recreation.
The report goes on to state that the school health service is seriously hampered by the inadequacy of medical supervision at home, and it further states:
The law should be amended also so as to remove any doubt about the power of local authorities to provide meals as a preventive measure. The provision of school meals, subject to approval of local arrangements by the central authority and the exercise of powers of recovering costs, should be encouraged.
We are empowered to provide meals for necessitous school children under Section 6, Sub-section (3) of the 1908 Act, but unfortunately we provide the meals


only to cure a disease that already exists instead of providing them to prevent disease being created. If we are to get full value for our money in education and for the huge expenditure from national and local funds, it would be wise to see that our children are provided with an adequate mid-day meal. That would do more in the way of education of physical fitness, and of building up a really fit nation, than many of the subjects which are being discussed in many Departments. At a conference which I attended last Tuesday I made a statement which I will repeat. It is a well-known fact in the case of a tremendous number of adults that if there were more visits to the butcher's cart there would be a need of fewer visits from the doctor's car. What applies in the case of adults applies equally in the case of our children. A good mid-day meal with body, bone and health-building properties would prevent that debility which we now allow to take place and then seek to remedy.
The social service which we are discussing is one of the greatest in Scotland. Many alleged economists attack our education system, but they are ofttimes, if not always, misinformed and ill-informed critics. They only look at it from the £s. d. point of view. I submit that our educational system is one of the most valuable of all our social services. I have seen that service make slow but sure progress towards the ideals that animated me when I set out on local administration 30 years ago. I have seen some revolutionary changes during those years in both the system of administration and in the outlook on education, educational methods and educational ideals. In Scotland there are only two social services which cater for a greater number of individuals than education. The expenditure on this service in 1910 was £4,439,000. The estimates that we are discussing to-day, together with the rate expenditure on education, find us now reaching a total of about £15,000,000 a year. The total number of people benefiting from that expenditure is 990,000, and when we look at it from that point of view the figures are not so alarming because it works out at only£15 a year or 5s. 9d. per week. There are many people who spend more on cigarettes and do not grumble at it, but who are always

grumbling about expenditure on the education of our children.
When we get these figures in their true perspective we are justified in asking not whether we can afford to spend this sum of money on education, but whether we can afford to spend so little. The question most often asked is whether we are getting value for our money, because whether expenditure be small or large, we are entitled to get value for the nation's money which is spent on various services. That is not an easy question to answer. It depends on what we expect to get and on our method of approach to this great problem. Some of the so-called educated people of the past believed, as some at present believe, that a universal system of education is wicked. I remember once reading a leading article by Heather Bigg, which he wrote in 1890 in his "New Review of National Education," in which he said:
The idea that all persons should have the rights to be educated is pretty, charitable, socialistic—
That must have been his worst condemnation—
but absurd, nay further, it is wicked.
Then we had a statement by the gloomy Dean, one of our greatest English writers, who wrote in 1921:
In the past the public schoolman has been exposed only to the natural competition of his own class, but now our sons—
the sons of the wealthy and the so-called ruling class—
have to meet the artificial competition, deliberately created by the Government, who are educating the children of the working class at our expense in order that they may take the bread out of our children's mouths.
If one looks at national education from that point of view our expenditure is wasted, but if we view education as a means of elevating the race I am satisfied that, while we might be able to get better value, we at least are getting good value for our money at the present time. Far too many people expect that with our expenditure on education we ought to turn out highly educated citizens at 15 or 18 years of age. I shall make a statement which I have repeatedly made outside this House: Schools are not where we educate citizens; it is the facts of life, the meeting of people, the seeing of places, the art of intelligent conversation, the thirst for knowledge and the


stimulation of the inquiring mind which enables us to benefit from real education, and the real purpose of our educational system is to lay the foundations on which to build the superstructure of an inquiring and independent mind without which there can be no real education.
While one may be a defender of our present educational system, it does not follow that one needs defend every detail in its mechanism or constitution. Great as is the progress we have made there is still room for greater progress. The curriculum is much too overcrowded. Much of it is dead wood and ought to be cut out, and to make for real success health and education must go together. After years of propaganda we are beginning now to understand the truth of that statement. To be undernourished and over-taught—and that often happens in our schools to-day—is a crime for which there is no justification, and if we are to get real value from the efforts of teachers and the expenditure of the money of ratepayers and taxpayers that state of things ought not to be allowed to continue. A great opportunity for educational progress presents itself. The raising of the school age, niggardly though it has been, and denying as it will to hundreds of our children the right of education up to 15 years of age, provides us with a new day school code which, if properly applied, will give us a new stepping-off stone in what ought to be a new educational system for Scotland. I am glad to see the disappearance of the distinction between secondary and non-secondary. All education beyond the primary stage is now to be secondary. Frankly, I am not so much interested in the label on the bottle as in the contents of the bottle. It is the curriculum which must be prepared by our headmasters, in consultation with the Department, which will make that new code a success and give greater progress to education in Scotland.
My time is practically up, because we are to-day again trying to carry through the self-denying ordinance which we have imposed on ourselves about the length of speeches, but may I suggest in conclusion that in the new scheme of education there are at least three important points which ought to be kept in the forefront: First, the capacity to express

oneself with the spoken word intelligently and not unpleasantly is essential not only to the performance of one's duty in any democratic society but also to the removal of social barriers. Special attention ought to be given to speech in our schools, because in that way we can at least do something to remove some of the social barriers which exist at the present time. The facilities for learning handicrafts and domestic subjects should be as liberal as possible and available for all. Closer contact between school and environment is urgently needed, because that will be to the advantage of both education and industrial and social institutions. In the making and the keeping of a free people we require the best system of education possible, the system which will enable our children as they grow to manhood to think and act for themselves. The making of intellectual giants among men ought to be the aim and object of Scottish education. Its aim and object ought to be the elevating of our race to a still higher spiritual, intellectual and moral plane.

4.52 p.m.

Mr. G. A. Morrison: As the hon. Gentleman has reminded us, it is some time since we have devoted our attention to the subject of Scottish education apart from occasional questions at Question Time. Since the passing of the main Act of 1936, and I agree with the hon. Member in regretting that that Measure did not make the benefits of an extended school life available to all pupils, I still hold the views I have repeatedly expressed in this House regarding exemptions—since that time a great deal of preparation has been made for carrying the Act into effect. It was seen that a new code would be required in order to incorporate the changes made by the Act. This was issued some months ago, and was accompanied by an Explanatory Memorandum. For the greater part of the provisions of the code I have nothing but praise. The new code naturally does a good deal in the way of tidying up and consolidating, but along with that we get words of wisdom and encouragement and even of inspiration to those who are doing the actual work of education. It is not too much to say that it breathes a liberal and enlightened spirit which is all too rare in such documents. It aims at nothing less than the unifying of Scottish


education and the simplifying of its organisation and nomenclature, much needed. I am glad that the confusion caused by such names as day school certificate, higher and higher leaving certificate, is now removed. We are now to have the self-explanatory names "junior leaving certificate" and "senior leaving certificate." As the hon. Member for Aberavon (Mr. Cove) has left the Chamber I may venture, without the risk of international complications, to read the opinion of an outsider on this new Scottish code:
This code has been issued without any blowing of trumpets, and outside purely academic circles has attracted comparatively little attention, and yet to me it seems to be the most important educational advance of recent years. If such a code had been issued in England it would have attracted worldwide attention. In Scotland they get on with the job instead of talking about it.
That is not the opinion of a perfervid Scot. It was expressed by an Irish teacher at a gathering of Irish teachers two months ago.

Mr. McGovern: He had kissed the Blarney Stone.

Mr. Morrison: The regulations for elementary, secondary and technical education are now included in one code. The code defines the natural divisions of the educational course and not particular types of schools. There are many things in the code to which one is tempted to refer, but I must select only one or two. It must give great satisfaction to all who are interested in nursery schools to find that they are given for the first time a place commensurate with their importance. This official recognition was bound to come, for these schools have long since proved their usefulness. The testimony of those who handle children coming from nursery schools is unanimous as to their beneficial effects. Dr. James Kerr, a Scotsman who did his chief work in London, has called the open-air nursery school the greatest educational discovery of our time. The tinder-Secretary has mentioned what Glasgow is doing. May I remind him that Aberdeen, in addition to taking over one voluntary nursery school, has built another one, and has recently decided to build a new one each year?
I was particularly interested to see how effect is to be given to the Section in the

Act which abolishes all post-primary names in education except the one name "secondary." With reference to the post-primary stage, I welcome the offer of freedom to teachers to devise alternative courses, and to try out new subjects. What someone has called the dynamic of initiative is powerful everywhere, and in education it is of priceless value. Taking the code along with the answer given to me by the Lord Advocate two years ago to the effect that the Government's policy was still that of the 1935 Circular, namely, to provide equality of status, equipment and staff for all post-War primary work, I am filled with great hope for the future of Scottish education.
Having said that, I want to mention the blot on the copy-book. The provisions for the maximum size of classes, especially at the younger ages, are unworthy of the rest of the code. The right hon. Gentleman told the House last week that he is not easily satisfied with educational progress. I wish to say to him that with a falling school population there is no excuse for not speeding up the process of reduction in the size of classes, and to remind him that modern methods presuppose smaller classes. If individual and group methods and special attention to backward children are to have their full effect in the hands of an enthusiastic and sympathetic teacher, the total number in a class must not be too large. We must all develop, and help others to develop, a sensitive conscience in this matter. I do not want to be understood as saying that we have made no progress. At the time when I began to teach, I can remember young girls fresh from college standing in front of mobs of 80, 90 or100 children. It was killing work for both body and mind.
Another part of the code which I have found of particular interest is that which discourages excessive centralisation in rural areas. This is a subject on which I could spend the whole of the 15 minutes allotted to my speech. It is an important question and is complicated by the related problem of rural depopulation. Some people are beginning to wonder whether this centralisation system has not something to do with the drift of the population to the cities and the towns. Some of the counties in Scotland find it a terribly hard problem. The most striking example in my memory is that of the Island of Iona, in which 30 years


ago there were 66 children of school age; to-day there are only three. It is good to know that those who control Scottish education are sympathetically aware of these difficulties. It is important to consider the effect upon the schools that are decapitated, so to speak. The loss to a district by the removal of the more highly qualified teachers is serious, and the loss of the older pupils is also serious. There is also the fact that when schools have had their tops taken off, the remainder of the school is often put in charge of a woman. I have no reason to say anything against the efficiency of women teachers, because I have had women assistants who have been better than the best of my men, but a woman can never take the place in a parish that a man could. The code recommends rural authorities to be generous in the matter of staffing. That is a matter for the Government, who ought to see to it that it is made easy for authorities to be generous in that matter.
Another event, outside the code, which has happened recently and happened quietly, is the establishment of the National joint Council of Administrators and Teachers. I first mentioned this subject in this House four years ago and it received the blessing of the late Mr. Skelton, who pointed out that while the Department could not put pressure upon anyone in connection with the matter, he thought that it would be a great gain if such a council could be set up. I am, therefore, glad that it is now practically in being. It will deal, although not exclusively, with salary questions, and it ought to be of great help in putting an end to the constant trouble over that question. In some areas of Scotland there have been continuous and vexatious changes in salary scales, and the teachers of Scotland would be very thankful if they could see a prospect of stability.
Coming back to the code, the encouragement of aesthetic interests is mentioned. These pursuits are valuable for recreative purposes in the schools for the time being, and also as laying a foundation for a life-long interest. School orchestras, school concerts, school dramatic societies and art clubs are very valuable. I should like to suggest, although I do not quite know how it can be done, that we should try to let musical and artistic talent have its opportunity. One

often hears it said that ours is a musical country. That is far from being my experience. My experience is that there is a vast amount of musical ability, and sometimes ability of an extraordinarily high order, but it lacks the opportunity for training and development. I would bespeak my right hon. Friend's sympathy in that matter.

5.7 p.m.

Mr. Barr: We are considering to-day a report which I am sure will be received with general favour in all parts of the Committee. I have given a good deal of consideration to what has been said and written regarding the coming into operation next September of the Act of 1936. I am pleased to note from the report that in regard to buildings it is laid down that there should not be extravagant expectations as to the numbers receiving employment certificates, which might curtail the size of the buildings. The report says:
We advised that they (the local authorities) should not attempt to restrict too closely their accommodation proposals because of this element in the problem.
That refers to the element of uncertainty as to the numbers who will secure exemption under the Beneficial Employment Clause. I do not think that the buildings will be too large if we take a generous view of what is necessary for the future.
I was pleased with the statement made by the Under-Secretary on the subject of bringing the Act into operation in September, and I am still more pleased with the Suggestions for Procedure, with regard to school attendance under the new Act, as embodied in the circular issued by the Department. The emphasis is there laid, as is done in the Act, on the nature and durability of the employment, the wages that are paid in the trades, for which the employment certificate is asked, and the hours of work. It is well to point out that the education committees and the local authorities are not bound by Acts which allow longer hours than they would desire. That was made very clear the other evening by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster when he was dealing with the Young Persons (Employment) Bill. He said:
I was asked what would happen if a local education authority laid down a set of hours which boys and girls up to 15 were allowed to work, and those hours conflicted with the Bill. It does not alter the powers of local


authorities in the slightest degree. A young person can only work up to the period laid down by the local education authority as being in all respects reasonable."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 19th July, 1938; col. 2157, Vol. 338.]
It would be desirable that when further educational facilities have still to be taken advantage of by these young persons, if possible the hours should be less than those that might be allowable under the Factories' and similar Acts. The report emphasises the importance of opportunities for further education, time for recreation, the school report on the pupil, and the medical officer's report. In dealing with the question of the choice of employment, it says:
It will, however, be clearly understood that the object of the advice will not be to secure immediate employment for the children, or to encourage them to apply for exemption instead of remaining at school.
The suggestions urged co-operation between local authorities so as to secure similar conditions for the grant of employment certificates, and that the standards for these employment certificates will be as high as possible.
Reference has been made to what are known as the advanced division schools, which now become the junior division of the secondary department. I was not altogether reassured by the statement of the Minister in this regard. Similar promises as to the complete equipping and staffing were made in 1924–25, and again two years later in the report of the committee of the Council of Education in Scotland. It said:
The general aim is to staff the advanced divisions with teachers as highly qualified as those appointed to the secondary schools.
That was repeated, but it remained an obiter dictum, and never came into operation. Will the Secretary of State kindly give attention to this matter of the proper staffing of the junior division of the secondary department? The number of graduates is still increasing, and that fact should help him in getting his principal teachers and additional teachers. I would remind the right hon. Gentleman of his own words on this subject. I hope that now he has been elevated to his present high position he will not forget what he said in the Scottish Standing Committee on this point on the 14th May, 1936:

It is not in any way a grading down of what is at present known as secondary education, but it is a grading up of the advanced division. We do not wish that the shorter courses should be in any way Cinderellas. When they come into secondary education, within the definition in this Bill, it will definitely be our policy to treat them as equal partners and to do all we can to see that that high status is maintained."—[Standing Committee on Scottish Bills, May, 1936; cols. 390–392.]
I would point out, and I welcome the fact, that in the Draft Rules and Orders in the Minute of the School Education Department for the Day School Code for 1939, no distinction is made in regard to staffing between the junior and the senior departments. I will not trouble the Committee with the words, but it is laid down that:
In a secondary division the qualification for the principal teacher of each subject shall be recognition in that subject in terms of chapter V or chapter VI of the Regulations.
There is no discrimination between the senior and the junior division. I hope the local authorities will be solicitous to give these junior departments the fullest possible status, and I could wish that the attitude of the parents would change. The Under-Secretary referred to it to-day. There is a feeling that there is something of higher social status in the five years' course, and the children enter it with no intention of completing the course. We used to say in Glasgow, when I was a member of the School Board, that there were 60 social grades in that city; every school had its own social grade, and parents objected to their children going to an inferior grade, as they reckoned it.
I come now to the question of unemployed teachers. On the 22nd March I put a question to the former Secretary of State regarding the unemployed teachers in Lanarkshire, and the figures which he gave me were tragic. There were three young teachers who had been unemployed for six years; six who had been unemployed for five years; 64 who had been unemployed for four years; 77 who had been unemployed for three years; 107 who had been unemployed for two years; and 110 who had been unemployed since they completed their training last year. Against that we have in Lanarkshire the size of classes. There were in April, 1938, 53 classes in Lanarkshire consisting of 50 children, and 22 with over 5o children. I have been astonished at the


levity of the House, not this Committee, when I have brought these matters up again and again. On the 22nd March I put this supplementary to the former Secretary of State. I exonerate the present Secretary of State and I hope that he will not give a similar answer. I asked:
Is it not rather serious that some hundreds of teachers should have waited two, three and four years.
All the answer I got, without a word of sympathy, was:
That is a matter of opinion."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 22nd March, 1938; col. 981, Vol. 333.]
When, on Tuesday last, I put a supplementary question to the Secretary of State:
Will he not expedite this matter in order to get at once better care for these children and employment for the teachers?
the hon. and learned Member for Argyll (Mr. Macquisten), with his usual pleasantry, dismissed the whole subject by saying:
Does the Minister not realise that children exist for the purpose of giving teachers jobs."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 19th July, 1938; cols. 1993–4, Vol. 338.]
The State is responsible for those whom it has trained to be its future teachers, and it has a responsibility also for those who are standing idle in this profession at the present time. I know many of these young teachers. Some of them have double degrees, M.A., B.Sc., and some of them are honours graduates. I would emphasise that most of them are the sons or daughters of working-class homes, and that their parents stinted themselves to give them a university education and a professional training. It is well known that no country in the world has a better record than Scotland in this matter of parents stinting themselves to get their children into a profession like this, and then the children remain unemployed. This stinting of parents in Scotland to give their sons and daughters a university education is one of the true glories of our country, and one of the brightest pages in the annals of the poor. I hope that the Secretary of State is not going to try to get off by saying that this is a mere matter of opinion; it is a serious and tragic problem.
As has already been pointed out, our new ideas of education need smaller

classes. The old idea, which was entertained from the time of John Knox downward, was to bring out the gifted boy, especially from the rural areas, and to give him a ladder up which he could climb, through the university, until finally he had his name on a brass plate in the school. We have a far grander idea now. We do not trouble so much about that gifted boy, because he will climb the ladder whatever you do. We now demand that the teacher get alongside those who are poorly equipped in body or mind, and to do that needs smaller classes and individual care, to bring them up, if it be only to the average. That is a far grander idea than the other, and means that we create a broad stairway up which all boys and girls of all ranks may pass abreast, to positions of honour, service and power.
I come to the question of the teaching of history in our schools and I want to give the Committee illustrations of what is to be found in some of the textbooks that are still being used in schools. I have the books here, but I am not going to trouble to quote the authority for each quotation I give. I will hand the books over, with the passages marked, to the Minister. My first illustration is from a standard history, published by Oliver and Boyd. Speaking of war conditions, this book says:
Then wages in many trades rose according to the rise in prices, till most workpeople were receiving about three times as much as in 1914. When thousands of women and children were employed to work along with men, the Trade Unions said they must be paid the same high wages as men. Mere boys and girls had great sums of money as wages, much of which was spent on pleasure and expensive clothes. Cinemas and Dancing Halls sprang up everywhere.
Not a word of the profiteer, or of the immense fortunes which were made by the rich. There is a description in one of those standard text-books of the first Labour movement which is described as being
dismissed for being involved in secret correspondence with the Bolshevists,
as if it were the hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. Gallacher), who brought down the first Labour Government. There is the same sort of talk about the General Strike and the crisis of 1931. I was delighted to read the following; whether it was written because of a desire to be impartial I do not know, but it has some unconscious humour:


The new combination was named the National Government, and it at once set to work to cut down the spendings of the Labour Government, and to impose fresh taxes on the long suffering taxpayer.
The Government are still keeping up that process. Then, in another of these standard text-books comes something which is not so impartial as that I have quoted. It states that by the formation of the National Government
the country was saved from failing to pay its debts.
I understand there was an idea that this history book should have a special edition published in America—but, needless to say, it did not mature. In its fulsome flattery of Britain, one of these books says:
The Government of India is one of the most perfect in the world.
I would like to see more of the Scottish language taught in our schools. I would like to see more justice done to Scottish nationalism—I am not speaking of the propaganda aspect of it. I remember, when I was in the School Board of Glasgow, we examined 62 books and finding that the name "England" was constantly put in instead of "Great Britain." It is not a mere fad to point out this fact. There is some justification for suggesting a textbook on this very point for use on the Front benches in this very House. Many of the best minds of our country have made their protest against the same thing. I will give the Committee what Robert Burns said in his letter to Mrs. Dunlop on 10th April, 1790:
Nothing can reconcile me to the common term ' English Ambassador,' English court,' etc. And I am out of all patience to see that equivocal character, Hastings, impeached by the Commons of England. Tell me, my friend, is this weak prejudice?
I know that the Scottish Education Department do not hold themselves responsible for the textbooks. It is also true and right to say that the history taught in our schools is determined not by the textbooks or by slavish use of textbooks, but by the schemes that are drawn up. There are many schemes which are progressive and well-balanced, and it is the function of the local authority and of the individual teacher to deal with it. I would give the individual teacher a good deal of scope, so long as he was not a mere propagandist. We do not desire to err on the other side. Statements about

economic systems should be historical and unbiased. The Totalitarian States may wish to put in only one side of questions like this, but we believe in a just statement, so far as it may be possible, of both sides. In Milton's words:
Let truth and falsehood grapple: who ever knew truth put to the worse in a free and, open encounter?
I would teach the young people, as they go forward in years, of the defects and the benefits of the Scottish Parliament. I would have them taught the words of Lord Seafield when that Parliament passed:
There's the end of an auld sang.
And I would not blame any teacher if he said that there was nothing better for a good old Scottish song than to have the "Encore." If anybody says that the teaching of those subjects is too high for young people, I would remind him of the words of Sir Walter Scott:
It is all nonsense to speak of writing down to young people; give them something to grasp at, and they will astonish you.
I would not exclude all references, as some would, to Kings and Queens or to the delightful story of the doings and undoings of Kings and Queens in Scotland; at the worst it is quite a good intellectual exercise. As to battles, no doubt there are some legendary tales of battles. Why should we not speak of Wallace? I would have every Text Book tell of the indictment of Wallace, when he was tried in Westminster Hall on 23rd August, 1305—first, that he was a Scotsman and the son of a Scotsman; and secondly that he carried himself as though he were the general of an army, and when asked to desist he refused to lay down his arms; and thirdly, that when he was offered money to lay down his arms, he still refused; and therefore he was "a thief and a robber." It is no legend that his head was fixed on London Bridge and his quartered limbs sent to the Northern Burghs; but I would not have these things taught to bring in any animus against England. I would rather have the teacher show that when you behead a man you turn him into a patriot, and you weld his nation together, as was done in that case.
The character of Robert the Bruce is a little more dubious in some ways, but this is not all a matter of legend either. I believe that a battle did take place at a spot called Bannockburn; but I would not have the Scottish teacher stop at


Bannockburn. In all fairness, I would have them go over the next two hundred years and describe the struggle as it is told in Tytler's History. They should go on to Flodden Field, and tell the children that there they will find far-and-away the finest monumental description of any battlefield in the world. Of course it was composed in recent times, but it is inscribed:
To the brave of both nations.
I would have them teach even Sheriffmuir and Culloden Moor and that saying of Sheriffmuir:
Some say that we won,
And some say that they won,
And some say that none won at all, man;
But of this I am sure,
That on Sheriffmuir,
A battle took place, that I saw, man.
I would have no objection to the teacher adding that that saying is true of all battles, and of nearly all wars; true even of the Great War itself: "None won at all." I would not object if they went on to say that a League of Nations had been established having as its ideal to bring about an end to all war. And, indeed, I believe the teachers do this.
We must take history from the social standpoint. While there are many history hooks, there are two great books that changed the tenor of history—Green's "Short History of the English People," and Mackenzie's "History of the Nineteenth Century." And there are other books that have shifted the interest in history from Kings and wars to social advance and factory Acts and what they did for the children. I would close on this note: Let those who frame our textbooks, and those who teach, remember above all that real history is the story of art, of invention, of the pioneers of industry, of those victories of peace that are ever more glorious than the victories of war; of social and industrial advance; and—there is surely nothing partisan in this—that it is and should be the story of the struggle, the endless struggle, often hopeless, of the common people, onwards and upwards towards a higher lot and a nobler destiny.

5.30 p.m.

Sir Samuel Chapman: No one can follow my hon. Friend the Member for Coat-bridge (Mr. Barr) without one thought in his mind, namely—and I hope that Englishmen here will not resent what I am going to say—that that speech, or a

similar speech in the same spirit, would not have been delivered in an English education Debate. It shows how much we in Scotland reverence the past, how much we reverence truth, and how much we reverence all the great deeds which our predecessors have done for the good of Scotland. I want also to take the opportunity of saying what I have long wished to say when I have heard my hon. Friend the Member for Stirling and Falkirk (Mr. Westwood) make speeches in the House, and that is that I am sure all Members in all parties in the House, and the people of Scotland, owe a deep debt of gratitude to my hon. Friend for his enthusiasm, his work, and his self-sacrifice in the cause of education. I say that with all my heart. I have sat alongside my hon. Friend on many Provisional Order Committees; I have sat at his feet in learning what is the right thing to do on those occasions; and I have known all these years that there is no one in the whole of Scotland who devotes more of his private time to public affairs for the good of his fellow-countrymen. I am delighted, if he will allow me to say so, to have had the opportunity of saying this publicly in the best place in which anything of the kind can be said.
There are just three or four practical points that I wish to put to the Secretary of State. In the admirable circular which was issued by the Education Department only last Saturday—a circular which, if it is read and studied by education authorities, and carried out, will prove of great benefit to Scotland—the attention of education authorities is called to one side of the physical fitness movement, and it is suggested that one of their chief duties should be to provide as quickly as possible trained and experienced teachers for the purposes of this physical fitness movement. The circular goes on to say:
The lack of trained instructors and leaders is one of the main hindrances to the desired development of physical fitness.
An earlier circular, No. 98, was issued a year ago last March, much on the same lines. I am requested to bring this matter to the notice of my right hon. Friend by the education authority of the city of Edinburgh. By a mere coincidence, this question came before a meeting of the education authority of the city of Edinburgh on the very day on which the new circular was issued. That meeting could not have had any relation to the new circular, because it would not have


been in the possession of the education authority, and, therefore, the remarks which were publicly made with regard to the difficulty of obtaining physical training instructors must have been made with reference to the circular issued more than a year ago. I have been requested to ask my right hon. Friend to be good enough to give consideration to this matter. The chairman of the education authority of Edinburgh, a very well-known gentleman, Councillor P. F. Allan, says that this matter is urgent, and he suggests that there is not a sufficient number of physical training instructors in Scotland at the present moment. He went on to say:
There could be no denying that there was a shortage of teachers, and, at the rates Edinburgh was offering, they were not getting the best. Indeed, they were having difficulty in filling the posts that were vacant.
The Treasurer of the City of Edinburgh, Treasurer Darling, also made a speech in which he suggested that a way out of the difficulty would be to obtain, whether for the time being or permanently, ex-service men as instructors in physical training in elementary schools. I do not want to dwell on the matter, though I could spend a great deal of time on it, but I would put it to my right hon. Friend, as an urgent matter, that the two admirable circulars which have been issued by his Education Department can produce no great results unless the regulations are relaxed, and the suggestion is that, if men who have been in the Army are competent, the education authorities should be empowered to engage them as instructors in physical education. My hon. Friend who opened the Debate on behalf of the Opposition is on the Physical Fitness Council, as well as myself and other Members of the House. When the Physical Fitness Bill, as we call it shortly, was before the House, a Financial Memorandum was issued which said that a sum of approximately £2,400,000 would be required from the time when the scheme was put into operation to the end of March, 1940. I notice that the chairman of the Grants Committee of the English National Fitness Council stated the other day that applications had reached the sum of £2,800,000, or £400,000 more than the total grant provided by the House for both countries, and I would ask my right hon. Friend whether he will see to it that

England does not absorb too much of the £2,400,000, and that Scotland gets a fair share.
This physical fitness movement under the auspices of the education authorities in Scotland has not, in public, made that advance and that impression on the imagination of the people of Scotland that some of us hoped it would. Much has been done. For instance, one of the chief schemes was for the advisory Council to assist existing organisations, like the Young Men's Christian Association, the Boy Scouts, the Girl Guides, and so on, and that is being done. Another was for providing, or assisting in the provision of playing fields. That has been done, and is being done, and done most admirably. But two things have not yet been done which must be done in the near future. In the first place, we must have throughout Scotland what may be called athletic centres, centres which will attract to them all the idle young people and all those who wish to improve their standard, both morally and physically. This movement of ours is the reverse of ordinary commerce. We used to be taught in school that the demand would create the supply, but in this movement the reverse is the case—it is the supply that will create the demand. What is the use of going on to a platform and telling young fellows, even if they come to the meeting—and I do not think that many of them do—"Keep yourselves fit; go in for exercise," when you do not even give them a gym-horse or a ladder on which to exercise their limbs? We want community centres fitted up with a decent gymnasium, recreation room, shower baths—a social centre which will attract to it all those who think seriously of life in their youth and who would prefer to go there rather than stand at street corners or lounge about with their hands in their pockets not knowing what to do with themselves.
The other thing we must do is to establish, right through Scotland, holiday camps. In my constituency—I am sure my friends in the constituency will not resent my saying it—nine-tenths of the blinds are drawn for a fortnight or a month in August and September. I want those people in other parts of Edinburgh who have no blinds to draw to have reasonable facilities for getting some fresh air in the country. The town coun-


cil of Edinburgh, through the education authority, is about to have, if it has not already had, a motion before it on this question of the establishment of holiday camps, and I trust that it will lead the education authorities of all Scotland on this matter.
There are examples in Scotland at this moment, which we can all see. The Special Areas Council have established two most amazing and wonderful camps, one at Rothesay and one a very few miles from Edinburgh, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Mathers). I was there with a few friends a month ago, and I saw one of the happiest sights I have ever seen in my life. We happened to get there just after 400 families from the distressed districts had arrived with their children. There they were, on a beautiful June day, going into their little habitations. There the children were, some of them having been there last year. I have seen, if I may presume to say so, rich people trying to obtain happiness in all parts of the world, but I have never seen so much happiness in an hour and a half as I saw on that afternoon in that camp. Why should we not have camps like it all over Scotland? We are out for two things: community centres and holiday camps, and I ask my right hon. Friend to do everything he can to further these two great projects.

5.45 P.m.

Mr. Mathers: The hon. Member for South Edinburgh (Sir S. Chapman) will forgive me if I do not follow him into the tempting subject he has mentioned in the last part of his remarks. It is true that the camp at Butlaw, near South Queensferry, in my constituency, is certainly a place where wonderful good is done, and it helps those people who go there to withstand the rigours of winter much better, I am sure, because they have been there in the fresh air and sunshine. I was glad to hear the hon. Member talking on that line. I was waiting, however, for one point which he omitted—I am sure it was an inadvertent omission. We need not only dumb-bells and Indian clubs, but food, to establish fitness. I am sure that the line that we on these benches take with regard to the physical fitness campaign is perfectly

understandable, and that it ought to command support. It is that, fundamentally, we require to see our people given better opportunities of obtaining all the necessities of life, and we should not expect them to become fit on physical exercises alone. They need to have the physique before they can benefit properly from those physical exercises.
We are again working under a time limit to-day, so I do not propose to enter into a number of other points that have been very strongly stressed in this Debate, and that affect the constituency I represent. I was glad to hear, for example—and I hope it has made a proper impression on the Secretary of State for Scotland—reference made to the need for providing employment for teachers who have been, for a number of years in some cases, through the training colleges, and who are fully equipped, and who yet—it seems, because of the equipment they have—are prevented from having the opportunity of earning their livelihood in the profession they have chosen. I hope that what has been said by other hon. Members on that subject will he noted by the new Secretary of State, and that he will apply his mind and energy to securing that those teachers who have prepared themselves for that important profession shall have better opportunities of obtaining employment than they have at present. I do not want to develop along the lines of the speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Coatbridge (Mr. Barr) either, although in that very fine, impassioned and eloquent speech I am sure he captured the hearts of all of us.
I am seeking the opportunity of making a complaint on behalf of the West Lothian Education Committee; but I want to preface that complaint by a word of thanks to the Secretary of State for Scotland for the way in which the Scottish Education Department have taken heed of suggestions in respect of the draft Day Schools Code that came from the West Lothian Education Committee, and which were made in respect of possible amendments to that code. I am glad to think that all the amendments that were suggested—amendments suggested in the light of real knowledge of the conditions that have to be faced—have been accepted by the Department, and given effect to in the Day Schools Code. I say that to show that although the West Lothian Education


Committee were disappointed on a previous occasion, they have not been in any way resentful, and are still applying their minds to helping educational progress in Scotland.
The complaint I have to make is in respect of the training of teachers in physical training courses. The West Lothian Education Committee have always believed in close co-operation between the headmasters and the parents of scholars, and the headmasters have been looked upon, and rightly so, as people who can assist parents in determining what will be the proper profession for pupils and the proper line of approach to the educational profession. The attitude that has been taken up by the physical training college has rather disappointed those who hoped for guidance in putting their young people into the teaching profession, and disappointed the headmasters in their efforts to guide their pupils into the teaching profession along the lines of physical training. There is only one physical training centre in Scotland. That is the Jordanhill Training Centre in Glasgow. When I raised this question with the Secretary of State for Scotland, as far back as 1st March, 1937, I got an answer which showed that out of 106 applicants for appointment as physical training teachers 22 were accepted. An analysis of the places from which those 22 came indicates that nine out of 30 applicants came from the Glasgow area. An analysis like that caused some suspicion in the minds of the West Lothian Education Committee that perhaps propinquity to the locality from which the majority of the members of the committee responsible for the appointment come had a tendency to cause the choice to fall in that particular direction.
Every effort has been made to ascertain what are the qualifications required for schools in this particular course. It is obvious that these physical training experts are to be teachers, and therefore one would say that they require a sound groundwork of good educational ability. But that does not seem to weigh so much, because, in respect of applicants who went from West Lothian, they came out in the test at the training centre in the opposite order from what their educational qualifications would suggest. I

mean that those who were highest in educational qualifications were placed lowest in the list of possible appointees as physical training teachers. It is necessary that a proper indication should be given as to what qualifications are necessary. I understand that the Education Department are able to give, in respect of the leaving certificate examination, a clear indication of the subjects in which improvement is required in order to enable success to be attained. If it is possible to do that in respect of the leaving certificate examination, the West Lothian Education Committee argue that it should be possible to give a proper indication of what is required in reference to the physical training course, so that headmasters may be able, before their pupils apply to go in for such a course, to say that there is a reasonable probability of their success.
I have pressed the matter I had quite a long correspondence on it with the late Secretary of State for Scotland. and he was not able to give satisfaction to the West Lothian Education Committee, in whose name I am speaking. I am now asking the new Secretary of State to apply his mind to this particular problem, in an effort to show clearly that there is no unfairness at all, nothing invidious, in the choice of those who pass as physical training teachers. I do not expect the Secretary of State to be able to give me an answer to-night, but it seemed to be necessary, after my failure in correspondence, to raise the matter openly to-day, in order that I might show clearly to the Secretary of State the feelings of the education committee in regard to this matter. There is a long correspondence, which I am not going to delay the Committee by going over, but I ask the Secretary of State to apply his mind to this matter, and to endeavour to give satisfaction to the West Lothian Education Committee on the various aspects of this question.

5.58 p.m.

Mr. Henderson Stewart: With the exception of some criticisms directed to the size of classes and to school buildings, I feel satisfied, after what the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland has said, with the general system of education in Scotland. We are naturally very proud of that system, and we very properly demand a high standard. I feel that,


under the present administration and with the present officials, that standard, on the whole, is being maintained. So far as the mental equipment of the schoolchildren is concerned, I do not harbour any anxiety; but, as has been pointed out more than once this evening, mental equipment is only part of the purpose and object of education. When boys and girls leave school, we naturally expect them to be quick, clever, and knowledgeable of the ordinary things of life. But we also expect them to be tit to withstand the hazards of life, to be strong enough to do an ordinary job, to be physically able to become worthy citizens. Therefore, we have a problem here of physical as well as academic fitness.
On physical fitness, we have had from my hon. Friend the Member for South Edinburgh (Sir S. Chapman) an account of what has been and has not been done with regard to the new physical and athletic campaign. I myself was fortunate enough to have been at a school where 20 minutes' gymnastics were provided every morning, and I think I have benefited considerably as a result. I most warmly support this new physical training campaign. It will do great good. But this is my problem, which I put to my right hon. Friend with all the seriousness that I can command. There are children of whom one knows who, on account of their environment, do not need that new physical training. They live in open country places, among the hills and valleys, among farms and animals. Their whole life is physical exercise. They do not need gymnastics in the morning to enable them to hold up their shoulders, walk easily, and have an athletic figure. Their normal life provides it naturally. But in some places which all Scotsmen know—and I think that I know most of the counties in Scotland—in some of the rural parts of our country there are children who are to-day not able physically to absorb the education that is given them, not on account of sloping shoulders and stiff joints, but just because, I am sorry to say, they are not sufficiently or properly fed.
This is a very serious matter to raise publicly and I do not do it without a great deal of hesitation, but it would not do to allow this Debate on education to pass without asking my right hon. Friend for some reassurance on this matter. The

problem of the feeding of school children is not a new one. Thirty years ago this House passed the Education (Scotland) Act, which provided for just this type of boy or girl who for one reason or another was not obtaining sufficient or the right kind of food at home. It made provision for meals and gave the education authori, ties power to purchase all equipment and apparatus necessary for producing meals in the schools. That was 30 years ago, and even now, 30 years later, only 40,000 children last year took advantage of the opportunity of obtaining meals on payment in the schools, and only 35,800 took advantage of free meals. If you add these two sets of figures together—I assume they refer to different sets of children—you reach a total of considerably less than 10 per cent. of all the children who attend the schools. If my experience is any guide at all, there are a great many more children who ought to be getting meals, either free or for payment. Take the average ploughman's family in Perthshire, my native county. The children have to walk two, three or four miles to school, though perhaps they now go mostly by omnibus. They go away from home in the morning. I have asked teachers, medical officers of health and other people who ought to know, and they tell me, time after time, that these children leave home in the morning without any proper breakfast at all. I suggest that without one full meal in the middle of the day for the children we cannot possibly hope to make our educational system effective.
This is not the place to raise the wide subject of nutrition policy, but I suggest that the Department of Education should expedite the inquiries that are going on now with regard to nutrition among children. While these reports are being prepared, and quite apart from these reports, they ought to consider at once whether they cannot extend the whole system of providing meals, and, if necessary, free meals for schoolchildren. I came across a case the other day—I suppose that there are hundreds of cases like it—of a family of five little children at a country school. They were having the usual bottle of milk. One day the whole of the five children stopped, and the local minister, having heard about it, went to the home of the children and asked the mother why she had stopped the children from having the milk. The mother said,


It is 2½d. a day, that is, Is. o½d. a week, and I really cannot afford it.
One regrets to have to admit that part of the trouble, perhaps a large part of it, is due to insufficiency of monetary income in the home. It is not for us to-day to consider whether or how we should increase that income—it would be out of order to attempt to do so—but in this Debate we can raise the matter of child care at school as one with which the Scottish Department of Education has a duty to deal. The difficulty about giving meals to some and not to others is that you make an invidious distinction. You may give it to Mary Somebody and not to Johnny Somebody else. One is able to pay for it and the other is not. Consider how much unhappiness is caused in the hearts of the children and their parents by that invidious and disagreeable distinction? Personally I would give free meals to the whole of the children in country schools rather than cause that unhappiness.
I may be bordering very nearly on the intervention of your Ruling, Sir Dennis, but I would remind my right hon. Friend that, strictly connected with this problem, is that of the maintenance of a virile population on the land. I know that, on account of this state of affairs that I have been discussing, many ploughmen, fine enterprising men, or, more often, the ploughmen's wives, active women, decide that they cannot put up with conditions any longer and in growing numbers they leave the countryside altogether. This is a most serious matter in many districts, and for these and other reasons I ask my right hon. Friend to give us to-day some indication of what is happening. I am aware of the inquiries which are now taking place. I know that Sir John Moore and the Department are in cooperation and that a good deal of useful work is being done. I would like to know where that work is taking place? Are these inquiries being made in rural and agricultural districts as well as in mining districts which happen to be rural? What are these districts? Is the survey wide, comprehensive and representative enough of all our conditions in Scotland? Upon all these matters I would ask for my right hon. Friend's advice. I will conclude by congratulating my right hon. Friend and his staff at the Education Department on what appears to me to be

an excellent year's work. We are advancing, and, as a Scotsman who had the benefit of a good education, I wish the Department every success in its good work.

6.9 p.m.

Mr. Buchanan: It is with some degree of fear that I intervene in a Scottish Education Debate. On Monday we discussed to some extent the problem of hunger when we considered the Unemployment Assistance Board's report. Yesterday we discussed the problem of housing, and to-day we are discussing the problem of education. I confess that I often wonder which is the most important problem of the three. To-day I want to raise what is becoming rather a pressing problem in the City of Glasgow. We have had vast areas of the population re-housed. People have been given better homes, but we still have in our city great masses of people who are not being removed to better houses, and from the figures we were given yesterday, it appears that, in districts like mine and in parts of the east end of Glasgow, large masses of people cannot be moved for many years to come. When new houses are provided there are often new schools also, affording better educational facilities for the children, but the poor people who are left behind have still to live in the slum areas and their children have to attend the slum schools.
I ask the Secretary of State for Scotland really to try to get the powers-that-be to recognise that there are slum schools as well as slum houses. I represent the division in which I was born, and adjacent to my district is that of Tradeston, and during the 45 years of my life there has been only one new school built in those districts. The schools that I knew when I was a boy are the same to-day. Apart from re-painting, which has to take place at the instance of the sanitary authorities, there is no change in any one of the schools that I have known since the first day that I remembered being able to think in any way at all. In Tradeston there is one new school, and I believe they are building another. The school to which I used to go is not a bit different; not one window has been altered. There are the same playgrounds but with this difference. When we were children the streets were good playgrounds. After 6 o'clock at night you


could play with complete freedom in most streets. There was practically no traffic, and the only thing one saw was a coal lorry. To-day there is no street in which motor traffic is not driven at least 30 miles an hour, and the streets have ceased to be playgrounds.
There is a school in my division where, although some of the people have been rehoused, the population is increasing. The school remains the same. The headmaster's room is at the top. Imagine a school containing a large number of children having the headmaster's room at the top of the building. The headmaster ought to be in a place where he can take command of the children in case of fire. Even if the Secretary of State for Scotland could not abolish these buildings and rebuild these schools, surely to goodness he could have some of them gutted and properly remodelled. The classes are overcrowded. I have never posed as an educationist. I always find that by the time I have examined the problems of unemployment insurance I have little time left for anything else, but I confess, even with my ruminations, I cannot understand the position with regard to advanced and secondary schools. If they are the same, why keep them separate? There is no difference between these schools, so why not make them the same?
The desire for good education is as great in Gorbals as in any other district in Glasgow, but what happens? A parent wants his child to go to Queen's Park higher grade school. I could more easily get into Buckingham Palace than a child from Gorbals can get into Queen's Park higher grade school. The number of children from the Gorbals district who have gone to that school can be counted on the fingers of one hand. I could never understand why children who live in the same district as I do are able to get into Queen's Park higher grade school while other children with equal capacity cannot get in at all. They have to go to another school, which is called an advanced school, but is not so good as Queen's Park. The Secretary of State can say what he likes, but at Queen's Park higher grade school you get finer buildings and more airy rooms. The conditions which obtain in the schools in Gorbals would never be tolerated in Queen's Park for a month. They would be demolished and rebuilt but, apparently, they are looked upon as being good enough for Gorbals.
Indeed, in Glasgow you have a position where there are five different grades of schools—the fee-paying school, the secondary school, the advanced school and two other types of school. In Gorbals there is no advanced school of any kind, the advanced schools are miles away, and you need good boots and good clothes if you have to tramp through the wet streets of Glasgow. In addition, the transport is most inconvenient. Why should not the people of Gorbals have an advanced school in their locality? It may be said that it is hoped to clear the district but that cannot be done for some years to come. I went to Camden Street school as a boy, and if the Secretary of State would visit this school now he would find just the same miserable rooms and conditions as existed when I was a boy. They are just as bad.
I hope the Secretary of State will consider raising the school age. I do not know whether hon. Members will be in complete agreement with me on this point, but I would not send a child of five years of age to the ordinary schools in Glasgow. That is my considered view. The only reason why they are sent in some cases is that they are better in school than they are in many of the bad houses in the district, but that is not a good reason from an educational point of view. The time has come when we should improve the conditions. Imagine a child of five sitting for hours on a hard seat. They reminded me of the seats for prisoners at Barlinnie—just the same kind of hard seats. That is not good for a child of five. I think that the hardest-worked person to-day is the child between five and 12 years of age. Just think what a day means in the life of a child. It has to go to school at 9 o'clock in the morning and finishes at 4 o'clock in the afternoon. Then it probably has to learn the piano or take up the violin case and go for a lesson. Then back at home afterwards, probably with some kind of a lesson to get ready. What sort of a day is that? For a child of that age it is not a day at all. I suggest that the time has come when to learn the piano and violin should be part of the teaching of the school.
I confess that I always envy people who are able to enjoy music and art. That is a blessing which I never knew, but my lack of it makes me desire the more that others should possess it. I do not know or understand music, but I


would like others to be able to do so, and I would like the children of Scotland to know something about music, something about the things which bring out the finest instincts in an individual. Why should a child after it goes home from school have to pick up a violin case and chase out, and then chase back? Why should not music be a part of its regular school life? I think we should see that the beautiful things of life are given to our children while they are in school. Why should they not be taught to swim, to learn that water is not a thing to be afraid off? I was at manhood's age before I saw the seashore. Why should the children not see the sea and learn something about nature, instead of having to sit on hard seats all day, hating the teachers and seeking to get out of school as early as possible? The school has no attraction to them; the average child today is very anxious to get out of school. I want to bring into their lives the most beautiful things and to make the school the most attractive place for them.
I want to raise a small question affecting Glasgow teachers and their salaries. Some time ago the teachers got cuts in their salaries but I understand that while the Government cuts have been restored there remains a certain section of the teachers who are still suffering a 10 per cent. reduction in their salaries. It is quite easy on a public platform to sneer at policemen and teachers with good wages—I have never taken that view—but at the same time teachers are performing a most important social function and should be decently recompensed. I think the Secretary of State, for the good of education, should see if he cannot get the Corporation of Glasgow and the teachers to come to some kind of agreement. I would urge the Secretary of State to do something to broaden our education. I want to see every child with an equal chance; there should be no difference—no distinctions. I think it is a terrible thing to go into a school and see one child walking in with his halfpenny and getting his third of a pint of milk, and another child who has no halfpenny looking at his friend and saying, "What a lucky fellow he is. He has a halfpenny. He drinks milk." That should not be allowed to happen in any school. It is not good for the child who drinks or for the child who does not. It is bad for

both. Why cannot you give them both a glass of milk, free? It is just as necessary for the child as reading history, or writing an essay. It is a cruel distinction to make. You may say that the child should have a halfpenny. That may be so, but the child is not to blame although its parents may be to blame. You may have some right to criticise them, but you have no right to criticise the child. Let us try to make our education broader and more uplifting. Let us abolish our distinctions in schools, make all schools just as good as the best schools where our children can learn the noblest things of life, and in this way make Scotland greater than ever. The measure of Scotland's greatness is not measured by one man here or there, but by the happiness of the common people.

6.29 p.m.

Mrs. Hardie: The point I wish to put to the Secretary of State is in regard to the curriculum for advanced scholars, and particularly girls. A statement has been made regarding an increase in the curriculum of domestic science teachers. I have no objection to that, but what I am afraid of is that in the extra year, as far as the girls are concerned, too much time may be devoted to what are called purely domestic subjects. The one thing which the women of Scotland will resent is that their girls during this extra year at school should be taught housewifery as it is being taught in Glasgow. We believe that education should be general up to the age of 15 or 16 years, and that no specialised education should be given to children until they have had a general education of that description. I do not want hon. Members to think that I am opposed to domestic subjects being taught, but we do not want girls to be given a specialised education to be domestic servants or even housewives. The aim of education should be to turn out intelligent young people, and hon. Members may take it from me that if the schools turn out intelligent girls, they will be able to cook a dinner all right, although they have not been taught cookery at school. We want this instruction to be linked up with other subjects, such as hygiene and physical training, biology, chemistry and so on, as is the case in the higher grade schools. There is a difference between the schools at the present time, because in the higher grade schools the girls are


not taught domestic economy, cookery, and so on, which are taught only in the elementary schools. I should like to have an assurance that the extra year which the girls will have in school will not be devoted mainly to training them in domestic science. We want the girls to have the same opportunities as the boys.
I make these remarks because I have a very vivid recollection that when I was at school, I spent a great deal of time in sewing a garment which my mother could have made on a machine in half an hour, and I saw the boys being taught much more interesting subjects. I know that things have changed, and that domestic science is much more developed than it was at that time, but I want to have an assurance that too much time will not be spent in that direction. Girls have the same right to receive cultural education, science and knowledge of that description as the boys. I would like also to have an assurance that there will not be any difference in the quality of the education given either to the boys or the girls who have to leave school at 15 years of age. We want variety in the curriculum, but we also want the education to be of equal status and quality, and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) pointed out, we want the same type of schools, and the same sort of playing-fields and amenities as the higher grade schools.
I hope that I shall be given an assurance that in the extra year during which the young people are to be kept at school they will not be robbed of a proper education and fobbed off with some inferior type of education on the theory that most of the girls will go into domestic service or into factories. I remember that it used to be the case in Scotland that the whole family, and particularly the girls, made sacrifices in order that the clever boy could be educated and climb the ladder. I know of cases to-day where the daughters are either domestic servants or working in factories, and the son is either a minister or a teacher, and very often he is ashamed of the other members of the family because they have not attained the same standard as he has. We want equal opportunities for all the children. I used to be on the Glasgow education authority, and I always felt that the ordinary boys and girls had to make sacrifices. The clever boys were provided

with scholarships to the universities, and special provision was made for the defective children, but the ordinary boys and girls were left out in the cold, and nothing particular was done for them. That is why I am so keen that the extra year should be used for the purpose of giving a good general education.

6.36 p.m.

Mr. Robert Gibson: The Debate on education is always one that is scrutinised very carefully North of the Border. We have heard with great pleasure the contribution made by my hon. Friend the Member for Springburn (Mrs. Hardie), who pleaded with skill and eloquence for the young women. I wish to associate myself with the sentiments that have been expressed by the hon. Member for South Edinburgh (Sir S. Chapman) with regard to the brilliant performance by my hon. Friend the Member for Coatbridge (Mr. Barr). All hon. Members who listened to my hon. Friend's speech will carry it in their memory for a long time, and we hope that my hon. Friend will long be spared to take that keen and energetic interest in education in Scotland which he displayed this afternoon, without the help glasses, with which I have to fortify myself.
The schools in Scotland perform many functions. I do not wish to follow the remarks of the hon. Member for South Edinburgh or the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Mathers) in regard to physical training. I assure them that they have my sympathy in what they have in view. Perhaps I may be pardoned if I say that I captained my school in cricket, I played for my university, and I won in the Bench and Bar foursomes; so that the hon. Member for South Edinburgh will see that I have my pride in that side of school life in which he is so interested. But I cannot get away from the fact that our schools are pre-eminently the institutions in Scotland that are charged with the preservation of our language and literature. It is the Scottish language and literature that the Scottish schools will preserve. Our language is distinctive and expressive. Provision is made in Section (5) of the Education (Scotland) Act, 1918, to provide books for general reading and to make them available not only to children and young persons attending schools or continuation classes in the counties, but also to the adult population resident therein.
Surely, among books, particularly when one is considering language and literature, a necessary adjunct to both school and adult education is a national dictionary. At the present time, we have in preparation in Scotland a national dictionary, and it will be a national institution. It is absurd to leave the preparation of a national heritage of that sort to the haphazard contributions of individuals here and there. This is without question a matter of which the Government should take cognisance in the interests of education in Scotland. If I succeed in doing nothing else this evening, I hope I shall cause the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State to note the very strong desire of the people of Scotland that the national dictionary now in preparation should receive not only the recognition but the support of the Government, as a very valuable storehouse of the means of education in Scotland. Reference has been made to the schools themselves. I would recall to the Committee that I used to belong to the scholastic profession. I am one of the few members who has the parchment of the Scottish Education Department, which is also held by the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. G. A. Morrison), who took part so helpfully in an earlier stage of the Debate.

Mr. Stephen: I also have it.

Mr. Gibson: I am reminded by my old fellow student from Glasgow University, now the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen), that he has a similar distinction, as has also the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton). My hon. Friend the Member for Stirling and Falkirk (Mr. Westwood) referred to the ideal of surrounding the schools by green belts instead of black bands. That is a very admirable ideal, but I would also suggest to the Secretary of State that the school authorities, and in particular the Scottish Education Department, ought to take care that around the schools there are no temptations to the children to do mischief. In the old days, when the macadamised roads were not tarred, there used to be stones lying about, and older Members will recollect that there used to be a great deal of stone-throwing up and down the country. But that is not done now. Why? Because the stones are not there. They are securely sealed

into the roads. Occasionally, however, one finds in close proximity to a school—I should like the right hon. Gentleman to pay particular attention to this, because it is a matter of some seriousness that has come to my personal knowledge—a house or other building which has been left derelict and in a state of ruin, and which is a source of supply of stones. These stones are an almost irresistible attraction to children.
I know of a case where bricks and stones were brought from such a building by the children from a school. They played at little houses on the footpath, and brought the bricks on to the roadway. People using the roads for the ordinary purposes of passage, in motor cars or on pedal cycles, expect the surface to be level and free from danger, but in the case to which I am referring, a workman going to his work on a pedal cycle was met by an oncoming bus, which had strong headlights, and he did not notice that there was a brick left on the road. The front wheel of his cycle came against the brick and he was projected in front of the bus, and sustained very serious injuries, not because of any fault on the part of the driver of the bus, but because some child from that school had been playing with the bricks and in a childlike way had inadvertently left a brick on the roadway, to the danger and hurt of the innocent workman going to his work. Where there is a building of that sort in close proximity to a school, I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that it should be the imperative duty of the headmaster of the school to see to it that the building is boarded up and that that attractive source of danger is taken away from the young children.
I pass from that matter to another subject which has not been touched on in the Debate, namely, the growing up in Scotland of school guidance clinics. We have one in Greenock. There are only four or five in all in Scotland. If I recollect aright, there is one in Dundee. These child guidance clinics are fulfilling a very useful role in the educational life of Scotland. The third annual report of the Greenock and District child guidance clinic has been sent to me, and I notice that the function of the clinic is to promote the study and treatment of children presenting problems of personality, behaviour or learning. There was


a conference at Greenock recently at which a resolution was passed, a copy of which was sent to the right hon. Gentleman. It was to the effect that the large classes which the regulations of the Department at present allow to be taught by one teacher did not permit of adequate attention being given to the abnormal cases which are bound to arise. It is just the wayward child, the child who has a little peculiarity, the child who is of the abnormal type, by that I mean a backward type, who needs attention. It may be that the child is left-handed or has a tendency to go astray in a particular direction.
That is the type of case which is investigated at the child guidance clinic, and the child can be helped enormously if the cause of its 'particular abnormality is discovered. These clinics are of a pioneering character and the need for them is emphasised by what has been said by the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities and I think also by my hon. Friend the Member for Coatbridge, to the effect that some children are poorly equipped in body and mind. It is just that little extra attention to the individual case in a large class, that can be helped by a clinic of the sort I have described. This is a development in Scotland of which more notice ought to be taken than is being taken at present. It is an admirable work and may help to assist the operation of our school system, particularly in regard to the classes of younger children where the numbers are at present so large.
There is one other topic on which I wish to touch. We have in our schools carefully trained staffs of teachers of whom we are proud, but is the right hon. Gentleman perfectly certain that we are making the best use of them? I have taken the opportunity of making myself acquainted with as many of the schools in my constituency as I could. As a result of my visits, I find that more and more of the time of headmasters is being taken up with purely clerical work. Surely the headmaster's function is something higher than the filling-up of forms.

Mr. Macquisten: He is almost like a farmer under the Marketing Acts.

Mr. Gibson: Or like a typist in a lawyer's office as the hon. and learned Member will probably agree. Something,

I think, could be done in this direction. Why should not more clerical assistance be given to headmasters? If a school is not sufficiently large to require the whole-time services of a clerkess-typist, surely a typist could be made available for a number of schools in turn. It seems ridiculous to find a headmaster busily engaged in typing out forms—a principal copy and a number of duplicates in every case—and returns of various kinds which are nothing but sheer figures. Why should his time be so occupied when he ought to be fulfilling his proper function of supervision or devoting himself to the "lad o' pairts" of whom we in Scotland have always been so proud and to whom we are anxious to see our headmasters giving special attention?
Perhaps it will seem to hon. Members that I am now dealing only with the small change of life in connection with this matter, but I would ask: Why should not every school have a telephone? I spent some time recently with the headmaster of an important school in my constituency and then proceeded to the office of the clerk of the school management committee. While I was there who should come into the office, but the headmaster of the school which I had just visited. He had come to the office in order to discuss a matter of the dates of holidays with the clerk of the school management committee. If he had had a telephone in the school he could have done the business in two or three minutes, instead of which he had to leave the school, pad his way down to the office, put in a period of waiting before he was able to see the clerk, then take up the time of the clerk, and finally pad his way back to the school again.

Mr. McGovern: Part of the "keep fit" campaign.

Mr. Gibson: There are other ways of keeping fit, and perhaps there are other members of the staff who are set aside for that particular purpose. In the case of the school to which I refer this deficiency has now, I am glad to say, been remedied and, as a result of a certain amount of pressure which I have brought to bear, both inside and outside Parliament, the education authority of Renfrew-shire have, I understand, arranged that telephones are to be put into the secondary schools. Why should it not be general? Why should not primary schools


also have telephones? Consider what happens when there is an accident or a case of sudden illness in a school and there is no telephone. The janitor has to put on his jacket and run down the road to the nearest medical man. The nearest medical man may not be available and there is serious delay. A telephone at the school would obviate all those difficulties. We are living in an advanced age. What is the use of spending time and money on securing highly specialised staffs and then spoiling the whole business because we have not that modern adjunct of a telephone in the school?
I do not wish to elaborate the point. I leave it as a practical suggestion with the right hon. Gentleman. It is being taken up gradually in Renfrewshire. The secondary schools, certainly in Greenock, and, I think, elsewhere as well, are being equipped with telephones, and I have no doubt that in the course of time the primary schools there will be similarly equipped. On the whole subject of this Debate, I rejoice to see the interest that continues to be taken throughout Scotland in our education system. We may not export a great deal from Scotland, but what we do export has a sound basis of education, and that basis of education has made the beginnings of careers which have helped not only Scotland but the world.

6.53 p.m.

Mr. Macquisten: I regret that I was not able to hear the whole of this discussion, and I particularly regret that I did not hear the speech of the hon. Member for Coatbridge (Mr. Barr), but there are just a few observations on this subject which I would like to make. It is fundamental to education that the child should be of a good physical frame and should be well fed. Some years ago I introduced a short Bill which I thought would help in that direction, but I was assured that no legislation of the kind which I proposed was needed. I was told that it was within the competence of education authorities to adopt the proposal which I made in that Bill. It was that education authorities in the large towns should open up schools in the rural areas, that they should buy up some of the big country houses, any of which could have been had for a song, take out to those houses the children who were willing to

go—because it is essential that such a scheme should be voluntary—take teachers with them, set up residential schools and allow the children to grow their own food and attend to themselves while they were receiving their education.
Think of what that would mean to the children. They would learn gardening and agriculture in the act of carrying out those operations. They would at the same time have their lessons, and they would get the best of food. I came across a school on the other side of the world where that method was being followed. The teacher and the boys cleared some waste land and planted vegetables. They kept pigs, sheep and hens. The result was that the boys in that school were splendid little farmers and good scholars as well. I examined their work and I have never found better writing and composition than I found in that school. When the news of this experiment became bruited abroad the example was widely followed and to-day in a large part of the Commonwealth similar methods of education are being adopted.
I ask hon. Members to consider what such an opportunity would mean to a town boy whose father has a poor wage, as nearly all the working-class have. They cannot buy vegetables because by the time the vegetables reach the market the prices are prohibitive and the vegetables are tired. But if the boys can grow their own vegetables, just as those of us who have little places in the country grow our own vegetables, think of the educative effect. In the case to which I have just referred, I noticed an alertness and vigour about those boys which I have rarely seen elsewhere. They were applying the principle
Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might.
They were far more ready and far better fitted for the battle of life than the boys who are trained merely on books. That school experiment marked a wonderful revolution. Why should not the Glasgow Education Authority acquire country mansions and invite children who are willing to volunteer to go out to them under similar conditions? They would have to be volunteers because you could never work it successfully by compulsion. But poor children—the children of widows or orphaned children, would be glad to go there, and when those who remained in


the towns learned that their schoolfellows who had gone to the country, were living on the fat of the land as a result of their own efforts, they would soon be clamouring for the opportunity of joining them. It does not take much time to do all the little chores that are necessary about a place of that kind. They would be able to carry on their ordinary school work and in the course of time in that way we could have a population which would be, to some extent, rurally-minded.
The fault of our present education system is that all the children become urban-minded. Even the country children acquire an urban bias. I believe that God made the country and man made the town, and if we could get even a comparatively small proportion of our children trained up in some such way as I have indicated, it would be a revelation to them. They would be taught to interpret the handiwork of God, through the works of Nature.

Mr. McGovern: Is the hon. and learned Member aware that they are doing that now in Palestine?

Mr. Macquisten: It shows that the Jews are the wisest people in the world. I believe that some of the schools of the old religion in England are now applying this method and I am also told that the Blue-coat boys, in connection with their new school, are being trained very largely on similar lines. I am also told that where the experiment has been tried it has resulted in an enormous improvement in the physique of the boys. There is no use in having learning, if you have not also physical energy and strength. Boys cannot get that physical energy and strength unless they get the best of food, and they cannot get the best of food from tinned stuff that is bought in shops. You must have fresh food with vitamins in it, and I have suggested a method of getting it.
In Rhodesia, schools were started in and near the towns for the sons of the farmers, but it was soon found that the pupils had too many black boys to look after them. Instead of having to look after themselves they had everything done for them. Then it struck some bright person that it would be a good idea to have a school in a country district and that the boys should do their own chores, make their own beds and look after themselves generally and grow their own vegetables. Immediately

there was an enormous improvement both in the virility and character of the boys, and they did their lessons all the better because of the additional eneregy which they derived from the physical work. That is a moral training for young people. It was entirely wrong that they should be waited upon by others. If education authorities would carry out that idea it would improve the race and assist the formation of character, which is the basis, the foundation and the goal of all sound education.

7.1 p.m.

Mr. Leonard: I agree with the hon. and learned Gentleman that it is a waste of time to endeavour to impart instruction to children in school unless they are properly attended to from the point of view of nutrition. In the past it has been insisted that this is a matter that must touch only the necessitous type of child. I venture the opinion that in a few years the feeding of all school children, and not only those who are necessitous, will play a much greater part in school life than it does at present. In Norway the fact that nutrition and education are related has been recognised for a number of years, but the method adopted there is different from that which finds favour in this country. While here we are thinking of mid-day meals from the point of view of putting something into the children's stomachs, they have adopted a different attitude. They sent out investigators to ascertain what deficiencies existed in the diets of the school children, with special regard to protective foods. They then set about preparing uncooked breakfasts, because in the main the protective foods are uncooked. They set about devising a breakfast which consisted entirely of protective foods, and now a protective food breakfast is given to all children whether they are deemed necessitous or not, and I am informed that the results are most outstanding. I would urge the Secretary of State to ascertain if this matter has come under the review of the Department and, if not, to see if something can be done in that direction. The same principle is adopted in general health activities and, as a result, infant mortality has been reduced from 46 per 1,000 in 1931 to 30 per 1,000 in 1936. Infant mortality in London is 67, in Newcastle 84, and in Glasgow 98. There can be no excuse for not taking cognisance of what has been done there and pressing


on the authorities in Scotland to take the same action. Milk is very important, but it does not supply all requirements.
The officers of the Board note in their report the unanimous decision of the Aberdeen authority to promote in their new housing schemes sites for nursery schools. That is all to the good. Glasgow is preparing for 10 nursery schools, but I am afraid they may follow the same line as Aberdeen and locate them in their new housing schemes. A special effort should be made in all towns to locate nursery schools in the densely populated parts, because it is there that they are required in greater measure than in the outlying districts. I note with interest the extension of broadcasting. I have come in contact with children who have taken advantage of broadcast lessons, and I have spoken to others with regard to it, and it appears now to be an accepted fact that it is a very desirable form of instruction. There are some places where it is left to voluntary bodies to supply the equipment. There is a comment on the reception apparatus being in the homes of headmasters. There are actually 2,000 schools without any equipment at all. Perhaps the answer will be that the responsibility lies with the local authorities, but children who are under the jurisdiction of local authorities have an aspect of State responsibility as well. The matter should not be allowed to rest where it is at present. If it is a good form of instruction, these schools should be adequately treated.
I should like to ask the Under-Secretary whether the architects responsible for the guidance of public authorities are taking cognisance of the need of canteens and dining rooms and other apparatus which will be required if the feeding of school children is made an integral part of school work. If they are not looking to the future in this connection, it is a lack which will be dearly paid for. With regard to holiday camps, there is a letter in the "Times" to-day. I do not accept the idea behind that letter, because it links up the question of holiday camps for ordinary school use with the requirements of air-raid precautions schemes, but it is a practical proposition which should be extended to a great number, if not to all, the school children who are willing to go to them. I read an article a year ago

which worked the matter out in detail and, while the details have been submitted to the air-raid precautions people, there is no reason why it should not be taken into the cognisance of the Department and applied for the purpose of holiday schools. The article worked it out in detail that a holiday school built for the accommodation of 500 would, in the course of a year, be able to accommodate 5,000. The period was a month. I do not contemplate the possibility of parents allowing their children to go away as long as that, though they may, but the shorter the period the greater the number of children who can be coped with. These camps at present are designated "camps for necessitous children," and, in my opinion, that is a deterrent. I think they should be made a general part of educational work and, if children were sent there for a period during which their instruction would be continued, their education would not suffer, and they would gain greatly in health.

7.11 p.m.

Mr. T. Johnston: I noticed in the Press that the Secretary of State, I believe for the first time, is giving monetary grants to two universities out of the Education (Scotland) Fund. To the extent to which he gives money to the Universities of Edinburgh and Glasgow, he decreases the amount that remains for school buildings and for the development of education generally. I should like to know whether, in return for the grant of £12,000 to Glasgow University and £4,000 to Edinburgh University, he is getting any State representation upon the governing bodies of these institutions. It is the generally accepted principle nowadays that we do not give public money without some say in the spending of it.

Mr. Macquisten: Imperial Airways—there are two directors.

Mr. Johnston: That is an entirely different matter. You have some control over Imperial Airways. Here, as I understand it, with the slight exception of the appointment of Regius professors, you have not. If there is no such representation upon the governing bodies of the universities, why not? It may be that next year Aberdeen and St. Andrews will come forward and ask for grants as well. If the principle be admitted that out of public funds, raised by public taxation


and expended through the Education (Scotland) Fund, the universities are to receive large grants, it is not asking anything unreasonable that the Government should be represented upon the governing bodies of those universities.

Mr. Maxton: The right hon. Gentleman mentioned about the Secretary of State having the appointment of certain professors. Has he not also the appointment of the principals of the universities?

Mr. Johnston: I think the principal is an appointment in the hands of the Crown.

Mr. Maxton: Is it not a very strong element of control if, in return for a very small fraction of the total university expenditure, the State has the appointment of the man in whose hands the chief directing power lies?

Mr. Johnston: I believe that up to now the universities have always regarded themselves as bodies which raise their own funds and are subject to no control whatever by the Secretary of State. What relationship exists between the Secretary of State and the principal of the university after he is appointed, I do not know.
The second point that I want to put to the Secretary of State is this. In our secondary examinations now we ask questions about literature and give quotations from literature, and the child is expected to be able to give answers about Dunbar, Burns, Barrie, Stevenson. A proper understanding of all four requires a knowledge of the Doric. He must know something about the Scottish language, and to know something about the Scottish language there must be a foundation; the teacher must know something about it. An attempt has been made to build up a Scottish national dictionary to preserve the language and to put it on record. In England a successful attempt was made to preserve the English language, the dialects. When the promoters of the English venture required assistance in their work, as they did, they applied to the then head of the Conservative Government in this country, Mr. A. J. Balfour, who got them the necessary funds. I will not say where he got them from. I know, but I will not say. The point is that he got the funds, and whether he got them legally or illegally, or from what source he got them, is a matter that I shall say

nothing about here. He got the funds, the English dialect dictionary was created, the scholars were paid, the books were issued, and for all time the English dialects are preserved.
Now we come to the Scottish national dictionary. Dr. Grant, of Aberdeen, and his coadjutors have been struggling to get the dictionary published. They have spent to the utmost penny of their own resources. Some of them have contributed very heavily indeed, and when an appeal for the comparatively small sum £2,000 or £3,000 is made to His Majesty's Government to enable this dictionary to proceed and the scholars to be paid, the Secretary of State for Scotland discovers, or is advised, that there is no fund out of which assistance can be given. I ask questions in the House about it, and for answer I am told that. I understand, however, that the Secretary of State and the Lord Advocate are themselves very anxious indeed that this dictionary work should proceed and should not be abandoned, that the two volumes already published should not in effect be wasted, and that tae other necessary volumes should be produced. The Secretary of State for Scotland and the Lord Advocate, I believe, have done and are doing their utmost behind the scenes to get the necessary funds.
I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will not invite the very able officials of the Scottish Education Department to find reasons for doing something instead of finding reasons for not doing something. If he were to say to the Scottish Education Department officials, "Please show me where I can get £2,000 to enable the dictionary to be continued," I am perfectly certain they could show him how it could be done. At any rate, I recommend that course to him, and also that the education authorities of the country should become signatories for copies of the dictionary, for a number of copies each. He could make a grant for that purpose, and there are other suggested measures by which aid, and final aid, could be given to this venture. It really is an outstanding national disgrace that a venture like this should only be carried on by the sixpences, the shillings, and the pounds of the devoted research workers themselves, and that the Secretary of State, or otherwise, should not step in and get the necessary £2,000 or £3,000 that is required, particularly when


the late Lord Balfour displayed an ingenuity, a courage, and a determination which I wish would be copied by his successors in office. If it is good for England that a dialect dictionary should have been subsidised, should have been created, and should have been successful, it is good also for Scotland, and I invite the Secretary of State to tell us by what method he proposes to see that this dictionary is not abandoned.

7.23 p.m.

The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Colville): Before I deal with the general questions that have been raised in the Debate, I should like to say a word or two in reply to the right hon. Member for West Stirling (Mr. Johnston). I cannot, in discussing the funds which are under review to-night, indicate to him where a grant could be found for the Scottish Dialect Dictionary. He spoke of the great ingenuity of the late Lord Balfour in being able to procure a certain sum of money for the English dialect dictionary, but I should say that that sum was relatively small. It must not be thought that it was a subsidy that anything like carried out the work of the dictionary. I cannot say the source from which that came, but that particular fund is not now available. The right hon. Gentleman asked me to exercise ingenuity, and he made certain suggestions as to the lines on which that ingenuity should run. I should perhaps mention that this dictionary is a fairly ambitious venture. It is estimated that it will cost about £30,000, and that it will consist of not fewer than 10 volumes, and the edition is to be restricted to 2,000 copies.

Mr. Johnston: Will the right hon. Gentleman get the money?

Mr. Colville: I will consider the lines which the right hon. Gentleman has suggested for the exercise of my ingenuity, but I could not, on the funds under discussion to-night, and with the legal advice which I have received, make any further observations on this point. In any case I could not exercise my ingenuity to the extent of going against the law.

Mr. Gibson: Will the right hon. Gentleman remember that he was Financial Secretary to the Treasury and that therefore he has a wide experience?

Mr. Colville: That has been a very valuable training. The right hon. Gentleman also referred to the grants to the universities. It is true, as the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) said, that the principals of the universities are Crown appointments, but as regards control, I would remind the right hon. Gentleman—what he really knows very well already—that the principle of giving State money to assist a university is not new, that for many years considerable sums of State money have been applied to the universities, and that the University Grants Committee have always recommended that there should not be direct Government interference with the management of the universities. The sums which I have proposed and which he mentioned are relatively very small compared with those much larger sums.

Mr. Maxton: Is not this money definitely a deduction from the local education funds? I am not asking for State control of Glasgow University. I do not want Glasgow University controlled by the Scottish Office or by Downing Street, but I think the Glasgow Corporation should have some definite say as to how Glasgow University should be run and that they should have greater representation, on a greater scale, than now.

Mr. Colville: That is a different point, and no doubt the hon. Member's observations have been noted. The Debate has thrown up a number of very interesting points, and I may not be able to answer them all if I keep the self-denying ordinance, as we have two other Votes to discuss, but those questions that I do not reach I will do my best to follow up. The hon. Member for Stirling and Falkirk (Mr. Westwood), who opened the Debate from the Opposition benches in a most practical speech on a subject about which he knows a great deal, spoke of a survey of the schools of England and said he was anxious that we in Scotland should not fall behind in that regard. The position in Scotland is that a survey was carried out three years ago and that that survey has been kept up to date. I am advised that 3,200 schools were fully surveyed. It is essential that we should keep such a survey up to date, and—

Mr. Westwood: Is it not necessary to have a black list on the same lines as in England, so that we shall be in a position


to know where the black holes of Scotland are, just as we know where the black holes of England are?

Mr. Colville: I am advised that we have such a list and that these black holes are known. The hon. Member proceeded to refer to the question of food and meals in schools, and that subject was also referred to by a number of other hon. Members, including in particular the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) and my hon. Friend the Member for East Fife (Mr. Henderson Stewart). The position is that in the year ended 31st July, 1937, 35,818 school children in Scotland were provided with meals free of charge and that 39,827 were supplied with meals on payment, while in 1935–36 the numbers were 33,800 and 30,900. These figures show the increase that has been taking place in that direction. In the year ended 31st July, 1937, again, 66,300 children received milk free of charge, and 260,700 children received milk on payment. The expenditure of education authorities in Scotland on supplying meals, milk and clothing for school children was about £105,000. A point made by the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) was that all the milk should be given free because there was an invidious distinction between the children who paid and those who did not. There is, however, in Glasgow a high percentage now receiving milk without payment, for of 180,482 children in Glasgow schools, 48,678, that is 27 per cent., were receiving milk free on 31st March, 1938.

Mr. Westwood: Is it not a fact that the meals are provided only to necessitous children, in accordance with the Act of Parliament, if those who are responsible for the provision of the meals are satisfied that as a result of a lack of food, etc., the children are unable to benefit by the education? What I was pleading for was that we should take preventive measures to avoid debility instead of taking measures after the child has become debilitated as the result of lack of food.

Mr. Colville: I was about to describe the procedure and to make some observation. It is not necessary that a child should have a medical certificate that it is in need of food before food is provided. The words "or otherwise" in Section 6 of the Act of 1908 should be noted in that respect. In practice many of the

children are provided with food on the report of the headmaster or teacher. Where cases are not necessitous the authorities may supply food, but not at the expense of the ratepayers. The hon. Member drew particular attention to the fact that the statutory procedure which has to be gone through before school children can be provided with food is somewhat complicated, and I agree with him. I understand that in practice Scottish children are not prejudiced as compared with English children, but I am examining the whole question and considering whether anything can be done to simplify the procedure.
The hon. Member for the Scottish Universities (Mr. G. A. Morrison) welcomed, as did other hon. Members, the new code. His welcome has been echoed fairly widely in educational circles. The only observation he made was that there was one blot on the copybook in regard to the size of classes, but otherwise he regarded it as very good indeed. The Departmental regulations lay down the maximum in a primary class of 50, in the advanced division or the first three years of the secondary course 40, and for the subsequent years of the secondary course 30. Occasional excesses, of course, take place and are difficult to avoid owing to the shortage of school accommodation in certain districts and to the shifting of school population. The hon. Member for Gorbals referred to this difficulty in regard to the new housing areas. The number of oversized classes, however, has steadily declined from year to year. At 31st March, 1938, only about 125 primary classes, which is less than 0.8 per cent. of the total, had more than 50 pupils. The corresponding figure for 1936 was 309, and for 1933, 2,119. We do not pretend that there are not excessively large classes in a number of schools, but I ask the Committee to have regard to the trend of these figures which present an important and interesting indication.

Mr. Stephen: Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why the Department has made the figure 40 for the first three years of the secondary school when it used to be 30? It seems that the Department has raised the figure to 40 in order to bring the advanced course and the secondary course on the same basis instead of bringing the advanced course down to 30.

Mr. Colville: I think the hon. Gentleman is in error about that, but I would like to examine it before answering him more fully.

Mr. Stephen: If I am right will the right hon. Gentleman give us an assurance that the change back will be made to 30 for both the advanced and for the first three years of the secondary course?

Mr. Colville: I will give the hon. Member an assurance that if he is right I will apologise to him for saying he is wrong, but I will look into the point that he has raised.

Mr. Maxton: It is always desirable when assurances are flying about to get them down in definite terms. Will the right hon. Gentleman inform the Committee wherein lies the error of the statement of the hon. Member for Camlachlie (Mr. Stephen), because it is common knowledge to every educationist in Scotland and everyone who has any responsibility for Scottish education, except the Secretary of State, that the figures mentioned by the hon. Member are strictly correct.

Mr. Colville: It is not my impression that there was such a limit of 30, but I will look into it and make sure. I will write to the hon. Gentleman about it.

Mr. Stephen: Will the right hon. Gentleman put it right if what I say is correct? Is he going to pursue a policy of reaction by increasing the number in the first three years of the secondary course, or will he get rid of this backward step for which somehow or other he has become responsible?

Mr. Westwood: May I suggest that the information is available to the right hon. Gentleman in half a minute if he is anxious to get it. It is in the House, and perhaps he will get it and tell the Committee which of the figures is correct.

Mr. Colville: I can assure the hon. Member for Camlachlie that there is nothing reactionary in the course we are pursuing.

Mr. Stephen: I will take that as an assurance that I am right.

Mr. Colville: The trend of the figures as to the size of classes, so far from showing a reactionary course, shows that

there has been marked and continuous improvement. The hon. Member for Coat-bridge (Mr. Barr) referred to some observations I made as Under-Secretary when the Bill for raising the school age was passing through the Committee stage. He said that I stated I was very anxious that the three-years' course should not become a Cinderella in any way. I hold to my words on that occasion. In the Code it is our intention to see that it is given the fullest and fairest treatment. The hon. Member raised a number of interesting points. One was in relation to text-books which are supplied to schools, and he quoted certain passages from which he deduced that the choice of history books was unwise. He was kind enough to pass the books to me for my consideration. He took exception to one quotation because it extolled the National Government and seemed to suggest that the Government of which he approved was not in the same class and was not so good. The same book also contains certain other passages, one of which I should like to read so that the quotations will balance each other out. It is on the subject of Free Trade and Protection, and it is a precept which I should dislike the young mind to assimilate too readily:
Protection is the putting of taxes on foreign goods to make them dearer than the home goods and thus induce people to buy the articles produced at home.
In the other book there is a paragraph with which I find much more cordial agreement. It reads:
Many thoughtful persons who were Free Traders before the War have begun to doubt whether since the War the old one-sided Free Trade is still good for this country.
Second thoughts seem to be best. The Department does not prescribe a list of books for use in schools, and they do not recommend or prohibit any particular book. The selection of text-books is left to the education authorities, and in general they delegate this duty to head teachers or a panel of teachers. To select books which would please the views of all hon. Members would be a very difficult task, and we might have to set up another Select Committee with all parties represented on it. Even then I do not know whether we should iron out the differences between us. It is in accordance with the trend of modern education that teachers should be given the greatest measure of freedom to draw up their


scheme of work and choose their textbooks. The work of the schools is constantly under the review of the Department's inspectors, who call attention to any faults of instruction, whether due to books or not, and if any wrong precept were being taught it would be found out by the inspectors.
The hon. Member for South Edinburgh (Sir S. Chapman) raised the question of physical training. I intend to say something on that question on the next Vote, and I will not say much now, except to observe that I agree with him as to the difficulty of getting fully qualified physical training teachers. I have noted the suggestion made by Edinburgh Corporation, but it must be remembered that these teachers are required for important organising work—

The Deputy-Chairman (Captain Bourne): I think the right hon. Gentleman himself realises that this comes on the next Vote.

Mr. Colville: I shall speak on the physical training campaign on the next Vote, but the teachers who are being employed are receiving grants of money under this Vote. They are for the most part persons with special experience of and training in physical education. The proposals of the education authorities for particular appointments will be considered by the Departments concerned. The hon. Member for Gorbals made a powerful appeal for the broadening of education and the improvement of the schools, more particularly in his own constituency.

Mr. Buchanan: And all the poorer parts of Glasgow.

Mr. Colville: He spoke particularly of his constituency and neighbouring districts of similar types, and said that the tendency was to build new schools in the new housing areas and to leave the old schools with little done to them. He will appreciate the problem which a new housing area throws up for a local authority. A school of some kind must be erected there; the place cannot go without a school; and it must be a good school. None the less, I will pay close attention to his observations. I cannot say that I am personally familiar with the places of which he spoke, but I propose to make myself familiar with them.
He also made an appeal for the broadening of the curriculum in schools, and in particular for the inclusion of the teaching of art and beauty. I suppose that the hon. Member has noted it, but I would like to draw his attention to a relative part of the new Code. In paragraph 15, on page 6, it is laid down that the scheme of work for the infant and primary divisions, that is for those up to 12 years of age:
Shall in all cases make provision (a) for courses of instruction in (i) reading, writing and arithmetic and in particular in the use and understanding of spoken and written English; (ii) music; and (iii) art and handiwork, (b) for physical education.'
In the Explanatory Memorandum which accompanies the Code, there is a paragraph which stresses that point. Paragraph 38 says:
Aesthetic sensibility should be cultivated through music and art.
I therefore think that on this point the hon. Member and I are in agreement. The new Code does have the broadening effect which he desires. The hon. Lady the Member for Springburn (Mrs. Hardie) was anxious that the domestic science course should not run entirely on domestic lines but should form part of a more balanced course of instruction. That point is being kept in mind. I do feel that there is value in a domestic course in its proper place, but she need not be anxious as to the way in which we intend to build up a balanced course with other work. The hon. and learned Member for Greenock (Mr. Gibson) asked me questions on some nine or ten points, and I am afraid that without shortening the time available for the Debate I cannot go into all of them now, but I promise him that I will look into them. They ranged from the use of half-bricks in jerry building to clinics, and telephones for headmasters. I will examine them.

Mr. R. Gibson: How shall I know that the right hon. Gentleman has examined them?

Mr. Colville: Because if any of his proposals can properly be carried out I shall take action on them, but I reserve to myself the decision on whether they can be properly carried out.

Mr. Gibson: But how shall I know?

Mr. Colville: The discussion to-day has been a very valuable and interesting one,


and I am glad that this Vote was put down, and also that a certain number of our English friends came in to hear the Debate.

Mr. Cove: Thank you very much.

Mr. Colville: Education is a subject on which we in Scotland have tried to keep in the forefront; we have tried to take the lead in education and I believe we shall continue to keep the lead. The hon. Member for Gorbals said the value of a country was not judged by a few fine examples among its people but by the worth and work of the mass of the people. I agree with him, but we must not neglect the fine examples, and I was very much interested in a ceremony in Edinburgh University yesterday which seems to indicate that Scottish work and Scottish education cannot really be at a discount. Among the distinguished people who received the LL.D. yesterday were the Viceroy of India, the Governor-General of Canada, the Governor-General of Australia, the Governor of Bengal, and two Cabinet Ministers, all of whom are Scotsmen, and four out of those six were products of Scottish day schools and Scottish universities. I leave with the Committee this last observation: That I am very glad that we can again to-day pass these Estimates with a knowledge that the educational system of Scotland is going forward and not going backwards.

Mr. Stephen: Can the right hon. Gentleman not say now whether he has the information for which I asked earlier? I was teaching before I came into this House, and before 1922 the maximum number per class in the first three years of the intermediate course was 30. Subsequently the number was increased. The advanced courses were set up after 1924, and it seems as though the Department has assimilated the numbers in classes in the first years of the secondary to the fourth year of the advanced course. I am asking him to give the Committee an assurance that the Government will not increase the number in the first three ears of the intermediate course.

Mr. Colville: I will read the hon. Member an extract from the Secondary Schools (Scotland) Regulations, 1923, Regulations which have been in force since then:
In courses beyond the primary, junior or preparatory stage, except in special circumstances—

I must emphasise that—
and with the express sanction of the Department, no class under a single teacher should contain more than 40 pupils in the first three years.

Mr. Stephen: The right hon. Gentleman is referring me to what happened after 1923. I am saying that prior to 1923 the code maximum for the first three years was 30—I am confident that it was a maximum of 30—and I regard it as simply evasion on the part of the Scottish Education Department to try to mislead the Committee in this respect. There has been a retrogression since 1923.

Mr. Gibson: Thirty was the number prior to 1914.

Mr. Colville: I can assure the hon. Member that my only desire is to interpret the Regulations as they stand, and I am reading out from the Regulations issued in 1923 and still in force. I will read the extract again:
In courses beyond the primary, junior or preparatory stage, except in special circumstances, and with the express sanction of the Department, no class under a single teacher should contain more than 40 pupils in the first three years,
It goes on to say, and here is possibly the explanation of the misunderstanding:
nor more than 30 pupils in subsequent years, nor, as a rule, may more than 20 pupils be taken at one time for any subject of practical instruction.

Mr. Stephen: That is the Regulation in force at present. I am sure that the hon. Member for the Scottish Universities will agree with me that previous to the 1923 Regulations the maximum for the first three years of the intermediate course was 30.

Mr. G. A. Morrison: I cannot speak about the exact date or the exact words of the Code, but I know that in the first three years of secondary schools we looked upon 30 as the maximum. It was afterwards raised to 40.

Mr. Westwood: May I put it that these new Regulations were issued immediately preceding the abolition of the old intermediate certificate, preceding the new system of education which was to come in 1924 arising out of Circular 44? It is true that up to the issue of those Regulations 30 was the maximum number in the first three years of the secondary course, and it seems that under the new scheme they have been assimilating the


courses with the old numbers that used to apply in connection with what was known as the supplementary classes, increasing the 30 to 40 instead of bringing the 40 down to 30.

Mr. Colville: I would point out that the present Regulations have been in force for 15 years and that during that time

there have been several Governments in office.

Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £4,693,427, be granted for the said Service."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 102; Noes, 171.

Division No. 313.]
AYES.
[7.57p.m.


Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)
Green, W. H. (Deptford)
Noel-Baker, P. J.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.
Oliver, G. H.


Ammon, C. G.
Grenfell, D. R.
Paling, W.


Anderson, F. (Whitehaven)
Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)
Parkinson, J. A.


Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.
Groves, T. E.
Pearson, A.


Barr, J.
Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)
Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Batey, J.
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Poole, C. C.


Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.
Hardie, Agnes
Price, M. P.


Brown, C. (Mansfield)
Harris, Sir P. A.
Quibell, D. J. K.


Buchanan, G.
Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)
Ritson, J.


Burke, W. A.
Henderson, J. (Ardwick)
Salter, Dr. A. (Bermondsey)


Cassells, T.
Henderson, T. (Tradeston)
Seely, Sir H. M,


Charleton, H. C.
Hills, A. (Pontefract)
Simpson, F. B.


Chater, D.
Hollins, A.
Sinclair, Rt. Hon. Sir A. (C'thn's)


Cluse, W. S.
Hopkin, D.
Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)


Cocks, F. S.
Jagger, J.
Smith, E. (Stoke)


Cove, W. G.
Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)
Smith, T. (Normanton)


Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford
Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.
Sorensen, R. W.


Daggar, G.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Stephen, C.


Dalton, H.
Kelly, W. T.
Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)


Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.
Stokes, R. R.


Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton)
Kirkwood, D.
Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)


Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.
Thorne, W.


Day, H.
Lawson, J. J.
Tinker, J. J.


Dobbie, W.
Leach, W.
Tomlinson, G.


Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)
Leonard, W.
Walkden, A. G.


Edwards, A. (Middlesbrough E.)
Leslie, J. R.
Watkins, F. C.


Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)
McGhee, H. G.
Westwood, J.


Evans, D. O. (Cardigan)
McGovern, J.
Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)


Foot, D. M.
MacLaren, A.
Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)


Gallacher, W.
Maclean, N.
Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)


Gardner, B. W.
Maxtor, J.
Young, Sir R. (Newton)


Garro Jones, G. M.
Milner, Major J.



George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey)
Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Gibson, R. (Greenock)
Naylor, T. E.
Mr. Mathers and Mr. Adamson




NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.
Courthope, Col. Rt. Hon. Sir G. L.
Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (C'mb'rw'll, N.W.)


Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)
Cox, H. B. Trevor
Gunston, Capt. Sir D. W.


Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.
Crooke, Sir J. Smedley
Hambro, A. V.


Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Hannah, I. C.


Anderson, Sir A. Garrett (C. of Ldn.)
Cross, R. H.
Hannon, Sir P. J. H.


Anstruther-Gray, W. J.
Crossley, A. C.
Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)


Aske, Sir R. W.
Culverwell, C. T.
Hely-Hutchinson, M. R.


Atholl, Duchess of
Davidson, Viscountess
Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-


Baillie, Sir A. W. M.
De Chair, S. S.
Hepworth, J.


Baffour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)
Duncan, J. A. L.
Herbert, Major J. A. (Monmouth)


Barclay-Harvey, Sir C. M.
Dunglass, Lord
Hope, Captain Hon. A. O. J.


Barrie, Sir C. C.
Eastwood, J. F.
Hopkinson, A.


Baxter, A. Beverley
Edmondson, Major Sir J
Horsbrugh, Florence


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.
Hume, Sir G. H.


Blair, Sir R.
Elliston, Capt. G. S.
Hunter, T.


Bower, Comdr. R. T.
Emery, J. F.
Hutchinson, G. C.


Broadbridge, Sir G. T.
Emrys-Evans, P. V.
Inskip, Rt. Hon. Sir T. W. H.


Brown, Col. D. C. (Hexham)
Fildes, Sir H.
James, Wing-Commander A. W. H.


Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)
Findlay, Sir E.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (S'k N'w'gt'n)


Butler, R. A.
Fleming, E. L.
Jones, L. (Swansea W.)


Campbell, Sir E. T.
Fox, Sir G. W. G.
Keeling, E. H.


Cary, R. A.
Fremantle, Sir F. E.
Kerr, Colonel C. I. (Montrose)


Cayzer, Sir C. W. (City of Chester)
Furness, S. N.
Kerr, J. Graham (Scottish Univs.)


Cayzer, Sir H. R. (Portsmouth, S.)
Fyfe, D. P. M.
Kimball, L.


Channon, H.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir J.
Lamb, Sir J. Q.


Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)
Gluckstein, L, H.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.


Chapman, Sir S. (Edinburgh, S.)
Goldie, N. B.
Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.


Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)
Gower, Sir R. V.
Liddall, W. S.


Clarry, Sir Reginald
Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester)
Lindsay, K. M.


Colville, Rt. Hon. John
Grigg, Sir E. W. M.
Lipson, D. L.


Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh W.)
Grimston, R. V.
Llewellin, Colonel J. J.




Loftus. P. C.
Procter, Major H. A.
Smithers, Sir W


Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)
Raikes, H. V. A. M.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G
Ramsay, Captain A. H. M.
Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.


Macdonald, Capt. P. (Isle of Wight)
Ramsden, Sir E.
Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)


McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.
Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)
Storey, S.


McKie, J. H.
Reed, A. C. (Exeter)
Strauss, E. A. (Southwark, N.)


Macquisten, F. A.
Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)
Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)


Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest
Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)
Tate, Mavis C.


Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.
Reid, W. Allan (Derby)
Thomas, J. P. L.


Markham, S. F.
Remer, J. R.
Wakefield, W. W.


Marsden, Commander A.
Rickards, G. W. (Skipton)
Walker-Smith, Sir J.


Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.
Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)


Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)
Ropner, Colonel L.
Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)


Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)
Ross, Major Sir R. D. (Londonderry)
Waterhouse, Captain C.


Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Col. J. T. C.
Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)
Wayland, Sir W. A


Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)
Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.
Wedderburn, H. J. S,


Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)
Russell, Sir Alexander
Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)


Muirhead, Lt.-Col. A. J.
Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)
Willoughby de Eresby, Lord


Munro, p.
Russell, S, H. M. (Darwen)
Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchin)


Nicholson, G. (Farnham)
Salmon, Sir I.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.


O'Connor, Sir Terence J.
Salt, E. W.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh
Selley, H. R.
Womersley, Sir W. J.


Peake, O.
Shakespeare, G. H.
Young, A. S. L. (Partick)


Perkins, W. R. D.
Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)



Peters, Dr. S. J.
Shepperson. Sir E. W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Pickthorn, K. W. M.
Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.
Mr. James Stuart and Captain


Ponsonby, Col. C. E.
Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)
Dugdale.


Original Question put, and agreed to.

CLASS I.

SCOTTISH OFFICE.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £148,321, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1939, for the salaries and expenses of the Offices of His Majesty's Secretary of State for Scotland in London and Edinburgh; expenses in respect of private legislation procedure in Scotland; a subsidy for transport services to the Western Highlands and Islands; a grant in lieu of Land Tax; contributions towards the expenses of Probation, and of Remand Homes; and grants and expenses in connection with physical training and recreation."—[NOTE.—£75,000 has been voted on account.]

8.6 p.m.

Mr. Colville: I am glad that hon. Members have given me an opportunity of saying something of the work of the Scottish Office. The method of doing so, that is, to move a reduction by £100 of the Vote which carries my salary, is the usual way we have in this House. The Office of the Secretary of State for Scotland carries many responsibilities, as hon. and right hon. Members for Scottish constituencies know well. The last two days have given evidence of how we have to turn our minds from one subject to another. The Scottish Office itself covers a multiplicity of subjects and it is difficult to know which to select in introducing the Estimate, because many activities of the Scottish Office come appropriately under other Votes and could be better discussed under those Votes. I intend to make a short introduce-

tory speech with regard to a few points which I wish to bring to the notice of the Committee, and then hon. Members will be able to raise those matters in which they are interested.
I will start with the newest service on the Vote, that of physical training and recreation. I intimated to my hon. Friend the Member for South Edinburgh (Sir S. Chapman) that I would say something on the subject on this Vote. Physical training and recreation accounts for nearly one half of the total Vote for the Scottish Office — £106,000 out of £223,000, in round figures. The fitness campaign in Scotland is now well under way. I know that some hon. Members think that it has been slow in starting, but I would ask them to keep in mind that it is a very big job that the National Council is tackling. It is not simply a case of ordering so many gymnasia, so many playing fields, swimming baths, and so on, up to the limits of the funds available. That would have been easy. The council's job is to give leadership in voluntary and democratic methods for promoting physical fitness. Its organisation, therefore, has to be democratic and its methods democratic, and that in the long run will give staying power and lasting stability to the measures achieved. All the elaborate apparatus for physical fitness in the world will count for nothing if the people of the country have not the will to be interested in it. To build up an organisation suited to the different needs and the different outlook of different localities, and to ensure that the organisation will carry the continuing good will of the people of Scotland, was


the essential first task of the National Fitness Council.
Let me sum up in a few words what has been done. Five Regional Committees, representative of a wide range of interests in each region, have been appointed. Those committees are being helped by local sub-committees or by local fitness associations. The Regional Committees have undertaken surveys of their areas. They have organised and held local demonstrations and they have been considering applications for grants. On 4th July, 242 applications from local bodies for grants had been received by the Regional Committees. Of those applications 59 were from local authorities arid 183 from voluntary organisations. Fifteen of the applications were for swimming baths, 55 for community centres, halls, gymnasia and clubs, 37 for playing fields and the remainder for such facilities as youth hostels, camps, and equipment for gymnastic and physical training exercises generally.
By 4th July also the Regional Committees had passed on to the Grants Committee 101 of these applications. The Grants Committee, in turn, have decided 68 applications, and the remaining 33 are now in an advanced stage of consideration. In addition to the grants for local purposes, totalling just under £12,000, grants of £8,708 have been made to national organisations for the employment of fully qualified organisers, for assisting their camping expenditure and for other purposes. A further sum of £12,000 has been set aside for grants in respect of playing fields during the present financial year; and grants amounting to £30,000 have been offered through the University Grants Committee to the four Scottish Universities for improvements of their physical training facilities.
The activities of the National Fitness Council itself, apart from setting up the local organisation, are also developing. The campaign cannot go far without trained leaders, and the Council have instituted training courses which are now in operation. One is the training college at Jordanhill, at which 143 trainees are attending. Another centre, comprising 165 persons, is being run by a voluntary organisation at Guisachan, Inverness-shire. Others are in operation in other centres. A scheme has also been announced

under which it is hoped to make 75 per cent. grants available for educational authorities for the appointment of full-time instructor-leaders. The propaganda work of the Council also is developing well. This is being carried out by demonstrations and by advertising in order to stimulate public interest in the idea of fitness—to stimulate it to the point of doing something about it. I might here make reference to the Fitness Pavilion, for which the Council is responsible, at the Empire Exhibition. That pavilion is drawing large crowds and the fitness demonstrations given there are amongst the most popular features of the Exhibition. I may also say that six specially prepared films are on show in the Exhibition cinema, and one of them is being shown all over the country.
Summing up, I think we can say, as I said at the beginning, that the National Fitness Campaign is now well under way in Scotland. It is a campaign, I believe, which will mean a great deal to us. Yesterday I spoke of the health services of Scotland under the control of the Department of Health. These services cannot give a full return for the expenditure on them unless our people as a whole live healthily. As we progress—as we are progressing—in removing the barriers to healthy living, more and more depends upon the individual. Yesterday we discussed the housing problem. When I speak of this fitness campaign hon. Members must not think that I fail to realise that behind a great deal of our trouble are the housing conditions, which we are doing our best to improve. But we cannot forget the efforts that are being made on a voluntary basis to help the people of our country to become fit. It is to stimulate a desire for healthy recreation that this campaign has been launched. It is receiving the active support of several hon. Members of this House. I may suggest that it deserves the support of all. I should like to pay a tribute to the voluntary effort, with which the hon. Member for Stirling and Falkirk (Mr. Westwood) is familiar, which is coming to the aid of this movement in a way that deserves credit.
There is one other item—or rather group of items—in the Vote, on which I should say a word. There are small increases in the Vote for juvenile welfare,


probation and so on. It may appear to have comparatively little relationship to other Votes, yet they all fall under the Department for which I am responsible. I am anxious to develop the system of probation in Scotland. It has amply demonstrated its success; and in a circular issued last month, in which I urged an increase where possible of the number of full-time probation officers, I referred to the fact that approximately 84 per cent. of probationers in 1934, 85 per cent. in 1935, and 86 per cent. in 1936, responded satisfactorily. I hope that the Committee will note these figures, which I think justify my being anxious to see an extension of the system in Scotland. The probation system, of course, applies to adult as well as to juvenile offenders.
Juvenile delinquency presents many problems into which I do not propose to go at the moment, because I must give other hon. Members an opportunity to speak. A sum of £I,000 has been set aside for an inquiry into some of the factors connected with this problem in Scotland. The inquiry will be conducted at the same time as a similar inquiry of the Home Office in England. The lines of it are being settled now and the actual inquiry will begin shortly.

Mr. Westwood: Will the inquiry be conducted by the officials of the respective Departments, or by some special committee?

Mr. Colville: I am not able to say more about it. I have told hon. Members that a similar inquiry will be held by the Home Office in England.

Mr. Maclean: Will there be a separate committee for Scotland from that which is being set up for England?

Mr. Colville: I have not indicated on what lines the inquiry will be conducted because that question is just being considered, but I will certainly bear in mind the considerations which have been offered. I gather that it is the view of the hon. Member that the Scottish inquiry should be by separate committee, but I think he will agree with me that in a matter of this kind close contact will be valuable.

Mr. Westwood: It is important to have a, separate inquiry for Scotland as opposed

to a joint inquiry with England, particularly in view of what happened in connection with the Fire Brigade Bill, in which there was legislation for Scotland without any consideration for Scottish problems.

Mr. Colville: I cannot say that I agree with the hon. Member about the Fire Brigades Bill, but I agree that the inquiry should specifically refer to Scotland. I have not yet announced the actual method of the inquiry, but I will certainly do so in the House. I am just as alive to the importance of this question and to the fact that there are special conditions in Scotland which require special attention and inquiry. I will announce the lines of the inquiry later.
Among the duties of the Scottish Office, which are exceptionally diverse, there is the group which makes the Office responsible for the machinery and the organisation of local government in Scotland. It is in this Office that are discussed the broad questions of area, grouping of functions, elections and so on. It is from this Office that are appointed the auditors of local government expenditure in Scotland, which expenditure, by the way, has reached the great total of £70,000,000. One broad issue over which a careful watch must be kept is the trend of the relationships between local and central government. Hon. Members know how, taken over a considerable period, opinion seems to have varied, at one time swinging towards central government and at another time towards local government. The cry at one time is for more central control in order to secure standards of administration; at another time the cry is against a central bureaucracy. The essential thing, and one of the most important functions of the Secretary of State, is to see that the pendulum never swings too far either way. Our system of local government is precious to us in Scotland. It is one of the pillars of our democracy. I therefore stress in all branches of administration the importance of co-operation with the local authorities. Both central and local government stand to gain from the closest personal contact. I think it can be claimed that such contact is steadily being strengthened in Scotland.
The opening in 1935 under Sir Godfrey Collins, of the Edinburgh Office of the Secretary of State has proved to be a


distinct success from many points of view, but particularly from this one. For example, during the last 12 months there have been no fewer than 1,500 interviews between representatives of local authorities and members of the Edinburgh staff of the Scottish Office. I would like the Committee to know of that, because it has meant a considerable saving of time for the 'officials, who would otherwise have had to travel long distances. There has been a much more ready personal contact than obtained before that Office was in being. The same policy is being pursued in the other Edinburgh Departments. It has been mentioned before, but I should like to stress it again, that 95 per cent. of the staff of the Department under my control are located in Edinburgh. Perhaps I might mention as a matter of personal interest that during the short time since I assumed office I have held seven meetings at the Edinburgh Office, all of which might have been held in London before the Edinburgh Office was opened. The availability of such an office has been of great assistance to the local authorities in Scotland.
The completion and occupation of the new Government buildings in Edinburgh will, I believe, still further facilitate cooperation between the local authorities and the central departments. It is hoped that the new building will be ready for occupation in the autumn of 1939. As hon. Members know, the Government have had under consideration the valuable report upon Scottish Administration presented by the committee over which my right hon. Friend the Member for Pollok (Sir J. Gilmour) presided. I am sure that the Committee will join with me in saying how indebted we are to the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues on the committee for that report. As the matters concerned will involve legislation it would not upon this occasion be proper to say more, but, as promised, I intend to make a statement on the subject, I hope next week.

Mr. Kirkwood: On which day?

Mr. Colville: I cannot be quite certain, but I think it will be Wednesday or Thursday.

Mr. Henderson Stewart: As the statement which the right hon. Gentleman will make will be very important, shall we have a chance of discussing it before we rise?

Mr. Colville: Probably the statement will be made in answer to a Parliamentary question, but I cannot give the exact day. I expect that it will be Wednesday or Thursday.

Mr. Maclean: Subsequently to that statement will there be an opportunity for us to debate the report, or any proposals based upon by the Secretary of State?

Mr. Colville: The hon. Member knows that I cannot say what Parliamentary time is available. I can only assure him that I will make a statement as soon as I am in a position to do so next week.

Mr. Mathers: Before the right hon. Gentleman leaves this point will he say whether it is intended, or whether we can have a guarantee, that when the offices are occupied they will contain all the staffs under the Secretary of State for Scotland and that they will all be accommodated after September next when the offices are brought into use?

Mr. Colville: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman had better await my statement. I have fully in mind the points which he has raised, but I can say no more than that it is our intention that the building should be fully occupied and in full use next year. Obviously I cannot anticipate what I am going to say on the subject of the reorganisation of the Department. Another matter to which I should like to make a brief reference is the important work of the consolidation of Scottish local government law. The committee engaged on this big task are making excellent progress, and are working for the completion of their first report before the end of this year.
As I said at the beginning, it is not easy to select subjects for the opening of a debate on the duties of the Secretary of State for Scotland, which are so wide, but there were two or three subjects that I wished to mention, and I have done so. I hope now that hon. Members who have put down the Amendment will take the opportunity of raising matters in which they are interested, and at the end my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State will reply.

8.26 p.m.

Mr. Neil Maclean: I beg to move, to reduce the Vote by £100.
I want first to take up the last item mentioned by the Secretary of State, namely, the Report of the Committee on Scottish Administration—known familiarly to us as the Gilmour Report—which deals with the manner in which the Department should be managed. I want to assure the Secretary of State that, while we welcome the subject-matter of the report, and are favourable to some of its proposals, we are not entirely satisfied with the proposals relating to the allocation of Government in Scotland. That proposed allocation is not satisfactory to Scottish Members on these benches, and I am certain that, if the ultimate legislation is carried into effect within the narrow limits and along the narrow lines of the Gilmour Report, it will not be satisfactory to the great majority of the people of Scotland. They wish for a broader governmental basis in Scotland than is indicated in the report. That is my personal view also, and I am certain that it is shared by other Members on these benches. I will not discuss that matter further, because, until we hear the statement of the right hon. Gentleman next week, and know whether we are likely to have another day or part of a day to debate the general contents of the report, none of us will be aware of the intentions of the Government with regard to the report's many proposals.
As regards the physical fitness campaign, the Secretary of State said that there could not be proper conditions of fitness among the people of Scotland without good health, and I think we are all agreed upon that. He suggested that a certain grant was being made to local authorities for the purposes of providing playing fields and other recreational facilities, as well as for the assistance of the local authorities in these matters. Unfortunately, owing to the changes which take place in the normal life of Parliament, the present Parliamentary representatives of the Scottish Office—the Secretary of State, the Under-Secretary, and the Law Officers—are entirely different from those who held office when the last Scottish Housing Bill was passed. At that time an Amendment of mine was accepted by the late Secretary of State, which laid it down that, in planning housing schemes, it was to be enjoined upon the local authorities that facilities

should be given for recreational purposes for the benefit of those who were going to be housed under the new schemes. I am not quite satisfied with the manner in which that provision has been carried into effect—

The Temporary Chairman (Sir Robert Young): Is the hon. Member discussing the question of housing?

Mr. MacLean: No, Sir Robert; I am discussing the giving of recreational facilities under the housing schemes, to which reference was made by the Secretary of State when he mentioned a grant to the Scottish local authorities for these purposes. I think I am quite within the limits of the Debate in mentioning the recreational facilities that are to be provided in connection with housing schemes. There is in the Estimate an item: "Physical training and recreation (Scotland). (Physical Training and Recreation Act, 1937)." I shall not deal with anything in relation to the houses inhabited, or likely to be inhabited, as the result of housing schemes, but with the lack of recreational facilities for the people, and particularly for the young people, in those houses, in regard to which the Secretary of State himself told the Committee that a grant was to be given to local authorities. I am hoping that the Secretary of State and his officials will bring very definitely before the local authorities of Scotland the fact that they are not either fulfilling the purpose of the Act of 1937 or carrying out what was laid down in the last Scottish Housing Act. I want now to refer to what I consider to be a dereliction of duty, or an evasion of a promise or pledge that was given to the House some years ago. An Act of Parliament was passed, giving authority for the building of a new criminal lunatic prison in Scotland, and during the Debate which took place on that Measure—

The Temporary Chairman: The question of Prisons does not arise on this Vote. There is a separate Vote for Prisons.

Mr. Maclean: If you will permit me, Sir Robert, to go on for a little while, you will see that that is merely a preface. I am dealing, not with prisons, but with the pledge that was made to the House by the late Secretary of State for Scotland and the Scottish Law Officers. During


that Debate, attention was drawn to certain things that were being done in regard to individuals of weak intellect, and to the manner in which they were being certified for the purposes of being sent to a criminal lunatic prison. We took the matter up, and Amendments to the Bill were put down. The Secretary of State, the Under-Secretary, the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor-General for Scotland, during the passage of that Bill, were all in sympathy with our proposals. Our main proposal was that, instead of two officers of the Department being permitted to certify any of these people as being devoid of intelligence, insane, or mentally defective, one of the two should be, not an employé or servant of the Department, but someone from outside, preferably a medical man who knew something of the family history of the individual who was being examined. That was the proposal put forward, and it was accepted by the Government, the Secretary of State for Scotland and his Department being themselves responsible for the Amendment which was put down on the Report stage and accepted by the House as safeguarding the rights and the lives and liberties of those individuals. We thought everything had been safeguarded.
A few months ago a question was asked in this House regarding a lunatic. The reply was that the individual had been certified by two medical officers of the Department. I put a supplementary question to the Under-Secretary for Scotland, and he could not answer it. He met me afterwards in the Lobby, and asked me to what Act of Parliament I had been referring. I mentioned the Act of Parliament, and stated the circumstances in which this had been accepted by the Government and put on the Statute Book. I received a letter some time afterwards, signed by the Under-Secretary, in which it was stated that the Amendment that had been put down in order to meet the wishes of a number of Members in the Scottish group who were present at the Committee stage in the Scottish Grand Committee did not apply generally, as it had been expected that it would when the Amendment was accepted, but was only to apply to the individuals who were to be committed, or likely to be committed, to the new Scottish criminal prison which was to be erected at Carstairs. The point is that in Scotland to-day the safeguarding of

those individuals has been turned down by the Government Department. They are either riding off on a technical reading of the law or they have not read the reports of the Debates that took place during the passage of that Bill, and they are now acting as though these poor people who are likely to be confined in the existing places are not to receive the benefit of the pledge given by the then Secretary of State for Scotland and the legal officers of the Crown for Scotland.
It is because of this breach of a pledge to the House that I am moving the reduction in the salary of the Secretary for Scotland. He, of course, is not personally responsible; neither is the Under-Secretary. The Solicitor-General has changed, and so has the Lord Advocate. The four leading servants of the Crown who then represented Scottish affairs in this House have now gone. One is a judge, and one is a sheriff, while the other two have passed over, and were a loss to this House. But the promise they made was not made as individuals, but as representing the Government, and when we find to-day that protection is not given to people who are in those unfortunate circumstances because of some quirk that is in the law, I submit that this House has been misled—if not deliberately, at least actually—by the Department responsible to this House. I know quite well that when the Under-Secretary replies I shall be told that this refers only to that prison. I would like to know when that prison is to be built. Is it started yet? Have they laid the foundation stone for it yet?

Mr. Colville: indicated assent.

Mr. Maclean: They have laid the foundation stone for it? Where?

Mr. Colville: I do not know how far I can answer the hon. Member on what is purely a matter for the Prisons Vote, but I can assure him that considerable work has been done.

Mr. Maclean: Considerable work may have been done, but there is no saying when the prison will be completed, or when it will operate, and until it operates these people will not have that protection, and when it is built only the people in that prison will be entitled to that protection.

The Temporary Chairman: Perhaps the Secretary of State can help me as to the Vote upon which this would be relevant? I think it is the Prisons (Scotland) Vote.

Mr. Colville: Yes, that is the one dealing with the institution.

Mr. Maclean: But I am not dealing with the institution. I 'am dealing with a breach of a pledge given to this House by the Department of the Secretary of State. It is upon the Vote for the salary of the Secretary of State that I must raise any question of maladministration. It is that that I am raising here and now. Though I have to bring in the criminal lunatic prison that is at present under process of construction, and has been under process of construction since 1935, it is only in order to keep the Secretary of State informed as to the particular Act of Parliament which I am alleging has been violated by the Department's officials.

Mr. Colville: As you have appealed to me, Sir Robert, on the subject, I think the whole point could be raised on the Prisons (Scotland) Vote; but as the hon. Member has raised it and wishes to have an answer, if you will allow my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary to reply to it, that will be done. I have a general responsibility for many matters, but it is usual and proper to raise them on the Votes to which they are related. But if the Chairman will allow him to do so, my hon. Friend will reply on this subject.

The Temporary Chairman: No, I cannot say that. I may not be in the Chair.

Mr. Maclean: On a point of Order. I am not dealing with the prison, or any prospective inmate of the prison, but with a breach of administration in the office of the Secretary of State, and I deal with that in the same way as it would be appropriate to deal with a similar case on the salary of the Home Secretary in respect of England and Wales.

The Temporary Chairman: The hon. Member is quite entitled to raise any question on the salary of the Secretary of State, provided that there is not another Estimate on which it can be discussed. He can raise any questions on the salary of the Secretary of State generally which are not covered by any other Votes, but it seems to me that this can be raised on the Prisons Vote.

Mr. Maclean: But there can be no administration of the criminal prison on that Vote, because the prison is not yet built. It is still in the building contractors' hands. I am dealing with practices which are at present being carried on in Scotland, which we believe should be stopped. That is where maladministration occurs in the Department of the Secretary of State.

The Temporary Chairman: But that should be raised on the Vote for the Prisons Department.

Mr. Maclean: How can I bring up a matter on the Prisons Department Vote when the particular Act of which I am speaking refers specifically, and was passed specifically, in order to authorise the Secretary of State for Scotland to see that a new prison is built. It does not deal with a prison, except to give the right to the Secretary of State for Scotland to build the prison. This matter is not dealing with the prison, as there is no one in the prison. This does not deal with people in Scotland who are in that prison or on the site of that prison, but it deals with people in Scotland to whom we expected that the benefit of that legislation was going to be applied and who are not receiving the benefit of that legislation. Consequently, I consider, with all respect to you, Sir Robert, that I am perfectly in order in dealing with the Secretary of State for Scotland on the Scottish Office Estimate. We are dealing with Scottish affairs, and we have a Scottish Chairman who has allowed me to go on very well, and I am grateful to him for the latitude he has given, but I still maintain that I am within my rights in criticising the Secretary of State. I wish the Secretary of State for Scotland to say why these things are not being done, and I will quote one particular part of the proceedings in the Committee. I said:
The Amendment gives the power mentioned … that you can go outside the Department.
That is, outside the Department for the appointment of a medical man to examine an individual who is accused of being insane. The Lord Advocate said:
Certainly we can, but it does not mean necessarily that you must go to the Board of Control or to any Government Department doctor.


I said:
You can go outside and select anyone, even one who has no connection with the Government service?
And the Lord Advocate said:
Yes.
Upon the lines which followed the decision in the Scottish Standing Committee, the Amendment, which is now part of the Act of Parliament, was carried. I submit that, as the Government are not carrying it into effect but sending letters to say that these circumstances are only to be applicable after this prison is completed and inmates are sent to it, they are misleading the House. I am asking the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is prepared to adopt the Amendment that was passed in order to suit us, and with our agreement, and to introduce methods by which it can be put into operation, so that it can be applied to people who are not receiving the benefits that we believed they would receive when the Act was passed in 1935.

8.49 P.m.

Mr. Henderson Stewart: The right hon. Gentleman has told us, and we have heard it with pleasure, that the new building on the Calton Hill is to be ready in the autumn of next year.

The Temporary Chairman: Is the hon. Gentleman referring to the new criminal lunatic asylum?

Mr. Stewart: No, Sir Robert.

Mr. Maclean: May I draw attention to the fact that it will be inhabited by the Secretary of State for Scotland and his officers?

Mr. Stewart: I apologise to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean) for not being able to follow him into the particular matter he was raising. I am referring to the site at the top of Calton Hill. I have felt for a long time that we should take a step forward. In this particular matter we have made a gesture to the national feelings of Scotland and said that we will have a more magnificent building on the top of that hill.

Mr. Mathers: Not on the top of the hill.

Mr. Stewart: Not on the top of the hill but very near the top. Cannot we take

a further logical step and include in that building an official residence for the Secretary of State for Scotland? It would be a proper thing to do. This is the highest office to which any Scotsman could have ambitions, but it would give it even a higher status if there was in Edinburgh an official permanent residence of the head of the Scottish government.

Mr. Kirkwood: Would it not be better, instead of erecting a new building, to set aside Holyrood Palace?

Mr. Stewart: That is an interesting suggestion, but I imagine that Holyrood Palace has other functions. I am not sure that we should not advance with the times and provide the Secretary of State with a new modern residence within this new group of buildings. With regard to the Scottish Office which was created in Edinburgh by the late Sir Godfrey Collins, may I confirm what my right hon. Friend said about the completely satisfactory results of the establishment of that office? The officers there have given great satisfaction to Scottish local authorities and every local authority with which I am in contact has expressed pleasure and relief that they are now able to settle so many problems without having to come all the way to London.
There is one other point I wish to mention in regard to the statement which my right hon. Friend said he wished to make next week upon the Gilmour Committee's Report. The announcement he will make will be of the very greatest importance to Scotland. Suppose that statement is made on Wednesday afternoon—we know that the programme for the whole of next week is already filled up and that we shall have no opportunity whatever of discussing it—I feel that our constituents in Scotland will feel somewhat dissatisfied that their representatives will have no chance to express their views upon it. It is certainly not for the Secretary of State for Scotland to deal with business, but the Scottish Office have considerable power, and I would ask my right hon. Friend to use his good offices in the proper quarters and suggest that part of the Debate on the Adjournment on Friday next might be devoted to this matter. I feel that we shall not be doing properly by our country if we do


not take whatever parliamentary opportunity there is to discuss this most important subject.

8.54 P.m.

Mr. Kirkwood: I wish to raise the question of conditions in the Western Isles, which I have been in the habit of visiting for the last 16 years. I spent eight days cruising round the Western Isles last month, and I found the conditions there gradually getting worse. That is an appalling statement to make. We sit here and listen to the Secretary of State for Scotland telling us of the wonderful things that they are going to do to improve the physique of the people of Scotland, yet here is a part of Scotland which, in my opinion, the Scottish Office is absolutely neglecting. It is true that the report which has been submitted to us is a very good one from the orthodox point of view. We are living in a new age; in the age of speed. The Isles of Scotland are speedily becoming depopulated. The conditions at the moment are absolutely appalling to anyone who has a love of his native land, not simply a romantic love of nature's wildest grandeur, but who has a regard for its most important feature—human beings. Not only are the Western Isles wondrously beautiful, but with the Highlands of Scotland they have produced right down through the ages a hardy and intelligent race.
Figures have been submitted by the Scottish Office itself, not by me, who may be accused of being biased, because I am politically opposed to the present leaders in control of the Scottish Office, proving that it is getting worse and worse. Every time I visit the Western Isles I see them getting worse and worse. I was led to believe from childhood to manhood that this was the place which bred a wonderful independent race of men and women, burly men and beautiful women, but when I visit them now I find that the great desire of the natives, whose blood has bedewed the heather in defence of their native land in former generations, is not to visit these beautiful spots, but to flee from them. The mothers of the boys, the wife of the minister, the wife of the doctor, the wife of the local lawyer, are appealing to me to try to get their sons a job on the Clyde, to get them into the offices or into some of my lawyer friends' offices in Glasgow, to get away from the place.

This is a very serious matter, because it is as true to-day in regard to Scotland as it was when it was first penned about England that a bold peasantry
When once destroyed, can never be supplied.
I want the Secretary of State to face the position. As I said last night—the Secretary of State was not then present, but I am glad to see him present tonight—

Mr. Colville: I read the hon. Member's observations of last night, and I want to assure him that I was absent only a short time on a most important matter on which, I think, he will agree, Scotland should not be unrepresented.

Mr. Kirkwood: I can assure the Secretary of State for Scotland that if I have said anything to which he takes exception I will gladly withdraw it. The reason I am glad he is present to-night is that I have appealed to seven Secretaries of State for Scotland to have courage. I have never challenged the ability of any one of the Secretaries of State or the under-Secretaries of State, but I have challenged their courage, and it is courage that is required. It will take a big man; but here a glorious opportunity presents itself to the Secretary of State for Scotland. I know that he is as proud to be a Scotsman as I am, but it is no use revering the heroes of Scotland as we do unless we are prepared to emulate the heroism which we respect. Anyone who takes upon himself the highest honour Scotland can give to one of her sons—because the Secretary of State for Scotland is a Cabinet in himself, and not only the representative of the King—carries weight such as no other Cabinet Minister carries, and I would like him to carry that weight and honour into the Cabinet. I want the Secretary of State for Scotland to go to the Cabinet as the Secretary of State for Scotland ought to go, bow to nobody, not even to the Prime Minister of Great Britain. I see Members of the Cabinet coming into this House and pushing the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Lord Advocate into the background. If I were there they would not put me in the background.
The reason I have said this as an introduction to my remarks is because this is something which is very very serious. There is an Isle nine miles by seven miles in extent which used to maintain a


population of about 1,000, and there is not a living soul on it to-day. They have been driven from house and home across the Atlantic Sea. You sail up the Western Isles, you leave behind Isles that are well looked after, Colonsay, Tiree, and then you come to Rum. The Isle of Rum is nine miles by seven and in 1828 maintained boo of a population. It is not only deserted now, but you are not allowed to land on it—an English gentleman of the name of Bullough comes along and buys it, and he will not allow anyone to land on it. The Isle of Rum—the natives, the clansmen, cleared out. I have said it before in this House, and it is an undeniable and an irrefutable fact, that if the Germans had wanted it, they could have come and bought it. The only people to whom it belongs are the craftsmen, not the ruling class of this country, not the great and wealthy, but the common people who love their native land, and who would not sell their native land. Why, if the Germans had got Rum, they would allow us to land; probably they would charge us something for landing, but they would not debar us from getting on it. That same individual would be brazen enough, no doubt, to call the clansmen together to fight for their native land if the Germans dared to enter Rum. It is too funny for words. We are not going to stand for it.
I hope the Secretary of State will take this matter very seriously. I do not want to threaten him in any way or to say any hard things, because my experience as a Member leads me to the conclusion that to do that does not cut any ice; but the Secretary of State may depend upon it that anything I can do I will do to support them in having all these wrongs put right. These wrongs are grievous wrongs. There is the great Isle of Lewis, right from Harris in the South to the Butt of Lewis, where everything is allowed to go, but where there used to be 30,000 inhabitants. The Isle of Skye, during the Napoleonic Wars which lasted 21 years, sent 10,000 men to the British army. They could not send 1,000 now from the whole Isle of Skye. The Isle happens to have a chieftainess now, the MacLeod of MacLeod, who is most anxious to do what she can to mitigate the conditions that exist in and around her part of Skye. Last month she showed me a document which

she treasures dearly; it is about a former MacLeod of MacLeod to whom the clansmen appealed to raise the tribute they paid for the land they cultivated. That is the spirit we are trying to engender to-day throughout the length and breadth of the Highlands, and it will be possible to do so if the Secretary of State is in earnest and uses the power which he has.
I ask the Secretary of State to visit the Islands. He should not go in a cruiser, as others have gone, because he could not get into the places in that way. Let him go by the passenger boat, which can take only 30 passengers on board. Let him go to Leverburgh, where a great establishment was erected by Lord Leverhulme in order to do something for the Islands. Leverburgh is a great centre for distribution to other parts of the Islands. The men who bring in the boat do so at their peril, for the whole pier is derelict and falling down. The passengers, when they land, do so at their own risk. I am riot telling the Committee about Russia, but about Scotland, my native land. I ask the Minister to go and see it for himself. Let him go and see the doctor, and the schoolmaster, and they will tell him. Let him go to Barra, which is one of the best places as far as trade is concerned, and see what is happening. The people are going down to the level that they are accepting what the Employment Exchange will give them. The great outstanding characteristic of my race, independence, has gone. There is none of it. They are satisfied now if they can get on to the books of the Employment Exchange, and they study the methods of doing so. I do not blame them; I blame the conditions that have reduced them to that level.
That is the situation as I see it. It is the duty of the Secretary of State to face that situation. Those men are the descendants of the men who played no mean part during the greatest of all wars They are the men who swept the German fleet off the North Sea, the most dangerous work that had to be taken on during the War. They came back to find that their country had become derelict. Let me quote what one of the greatest statesmen and builders of the British Empire said about these men. The quotation is from a speech by the Earl of Chatham in the House of Lords on 14th January, 1765. In order that the Committee may understand the quotation, let


me explain that in 1765–20 years after the Highlanders and Islanders were backing Prince Charlie against the Government—the Earl of Chatham said:
I have no local attachments; it is indifferent to me, whether a man was rocked in his cradle on this side or that side of the Tweed. I sought for merit wherever it was to be found. It is my boast, that I was the first minister who looked for it, and I found it in the mountains in the North. I called it forth, and drew it into your service, a hardy and intrepid race of men! men who, when left by your jealousy, became a prey to the artifices of your enemies, and had gone nigh to have overturned the State in the war before the last. These men in the last war were brought to combat on your side; they served with fidelity, as they fought with valour, and conquered for you in every part of the world.
It is for the descendants of those men that I appeal to-day, as a Scotsman, to the Secretary of State for Scotland. I ask the right hon. Gentleman to quit himself like a man, and see to it that the wrongs which are being committed to-day in the Highlands of Scotland are righted. If he makes that attempt he will have no greater supporter than the Member for Dumbarton Burghs.

9.15 p.m.

Sir Henry Fildes: I wish to intervene for a few minutes to recount the experience which I have had as a Scottish Member in relation to the Scottish Office. I have repeatedly raised questions affecting Scotland in this House only to be met with the reply, "The Secretary of State has no power to deal with the matter." I had hoped that the Secretary of State would have been able to do something in the case of those men who, as it now turns out, have been wrongly rated and have been paying rates which are now stated to have been unfairly levied. I should like to know whether it will be possible to give compensation to those men in respect of rates paid by them which have since been declared to have been illegally levied. A second point which I wish to put forward refers to the condition of the smallholders in Scotland.

The Temporary Chairman: I am afraid that the hon. Member is going beyond the scope of the Vote which is before the Committee.

Sir H. Fildes: I thank you, Sir Robert for your Ruling. I only ask the Secretary of State if there is an opportunity later on, to give us some information on

those points. Like other Members from Scotland I expect great things from the present Secretary of State. The hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) told us that he recalled seven Secretaries of State for Scotland including Lord Novar, Sir Godfrey Collins, Mr. William Adamson, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Pollok (Sir J. Gilmour) and the present Minister of Health, and he added that he was expecting more from the present occupant of the Office than we had ever received before. I put this to the Secretary of State. If, on looking through the list of his duties, he finds that he is hampered in any respect by regulations, or if he finds that he has no power at present to deal with injustices, will he not take steps to secure the necessary powers? I am sure that he will have the support of every Member of this House if, in cases where he finds that he has not the necessary powers to remedy injustices, he will take steps to secure those powers for himself and his successors in office.

9.18 p.m.

Mr. Cassells: I wish to make certain at the outset of my remarks that anything which I say will be strictly in order, and I therefore indicate at once that the matter which I intend to raise, subject to your Ruling, Sir Robert, is the question of the treatment of juvenile delinquents to which reference has already been made by the Secretary of State. The right hon. Gentleman drew attention to the fact that the latest results of the probationary system in Scotland showed a measure of successful achievement. I propose to canvass that point and to indicate that a suggestion which I placed before the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor in the Scottish Standing Committee some time ago for a further improvement in the treatment of juvenile delinquents, would be advantageous to the community. The point arises on paragraphs F, H, and I, in the Vote. I entirely favour the system of probation. At the same time, I submit with respect and confidence to the right hon. Gentleman that it has definite disadvantages, particularly when the question arises of supervision by a probation officer. Only two days ago the hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. Gallacher) put a question to the Minister with regard to a probation officer in the county of Fife and I wish to suggest that, under certain conditions, the


enlistment of the services, even of a probation officer is unnecessary. On 14th July I put the following question to the right hon. Gentleman:
What instructions have been given by his Department to judges presiding in the inferior courts of Scotland quoad the examination of juvenile delinquents by psycho-analysts prior to sentence being imposed?
The reason for that question was a specific undertaking given to me in the Scottish Standing Committee when the Criminal Procedure Bill was under discussion, that a suggestion which I made with regard to utilising the services of a psycho-analyst would be fully considered. I was greatly shocked and astonished at the nature of the reply given by the Under-Secretary. It was:
No instructions are issued by my right hon. Friend to courts in Scotland. It has, however, been recommended to all courts that on every occasion when there is any suspicion of defect or abnormality a medical and mental examination should be conducted by the most skilful specialist available,"—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 14th July, 1938; col. 1556, Vol. 338.]
My comment on that answer is that it shows a complete lack of knowledge or of sympathy on the part of the right hon. Gentleman's Department as regards the present position. I have had considerable experience in cases of this sort, and anyone who has had any experience of such cases is bound to admit that in almost every instance of juvenile delinquency there is a defect of some sort or other in the delinquent. Yet the only satisfaction I can get is the statement that on every occasion when there is any suspicion of defect or abnormality an examination is to be made. I contend that a great percentage of the expenditure on Borstal treatment, approved schools and the probationary system could be avoided if, in many of these cases, in the first instance, the service of a psychoanalyst were enlisted. Is there any justification for that? Instead of the position improving, so far as criminal statistics are concerned, it is definitely becoming worse.
The Lord Advocate cannot possibly say that the increase in the incidence of crime is to be accounted for by the increase in the number of convictions under the Road Traffic Act. Making due allowance for that, there is still definitely an increase. In 1927 the number of convictions was 120,246; in 1935, it was 117,737; and in

1936 it had increased to the enormous number of 128,899. No material change has taken place in the number of juvenile delinquents sent to schools of some sort—Borstal institutions for example. In 1919 the number was 118; in 1933, 135; in 1934, 118; in 1935, 122; and in 1936, 119. In the case of approved schools the figures are for 1934, 367; 1935, 411; and 1936, 426. Whipping orders in 1929 amounted to 183; in 1930, 161; and in 1936, 230. Cases committed to the care of a suitable person in 1934 were eight; in 1935, two; and in 1936, two. These figures speak for themselves and show that the cases are increasing. I heartily encourage the right hon. Gentleman in the venture that he now has in hand in regard to the probationary system, but I would seriously ask him to consider my suggestion from the point of view of trying to help these young people in the battle of life.
I wish to raise a point in connection with air-raid precautions. In Dumbarton a scheme has been drawn up by the county council. Long before it was ever formulated the Department in Edinburgh was approached by the town council of Milngavie, which is a very progressive body. It placed before the Department a very particular and concise plan of its own to take care of the waterworks of the Glasgow Corporation, which are within the confines of the burgh. There is a complete block between the two bodies. The county council is endeavouring to force its scheme upon the town council, which says that in no circumstances will it have anything to do with it. I suggest, irrespective of the rights or wrongs of the question, that the right hon. Gentleman should receive a deputation from the town council. Unless the Department is prepared to give regard and consideration to the position of the town council there will be no co-operation of any sort between these two very important authorities, and it may very well be that, if the right hon. Gentleman is prepared to listen to a deputation from the Milngavie people, he could make them understand that they ought to co-operate more with the county council in the future than they have done in the past. I shall exercise any little influence that I possess in an effort to see that there is complete co-operation between these two authorities in this very important problem.

9.32 p.m.

Mr. Wedderburn: I am afraid this Vote is very much in the nature of a mixed grill. It appears very doubtful whether some of the subjects that have been raised are in order or not. The first point raised by the hon. Member who has just spoken we anticipated would be raised on the following Vote, and the Lord Advocate had intended to reply.

Mr. Cassells: I fully intended to raise it on the Lord Advocate's Vote, but in view of the fact that the Chairman permitted the Secretary of State to raise the question of the probationary system I was compelled to discuss it here.

Mr. Wedderburn: I was not suggesting that it ought not to have been raised on another Vote. I only mentioned it as a a illustration that the Vote is rather like a mixed grill. The position is this: It would not have been possible for any undertaking to be given in the Scottish Standing Committee that my right hon. Friend should instruct the courts to do anything because he is not in a position to give instructions to courts of justice. What he has done is to make the recommendation referred to in my answer which the hon. Member read. With regard to the psycho-therapeutic treatment of young delinquents, the treatment, if given, is generally combined in England with Borstal detention. This form of treatment is still in an experimental stage in England, and, if it is found satisfactory there, it will be extended to Scotland.

Mr. Cassells: Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that in quite a number of the English courts the services of a psychoanalyist are available and have been for some time?

Mr. Wedderburn: I have gone on to another point. I am now talking about psycho-therapy after sentence. With regard to the evidence of a psycho-analyst before sentence, the position is as stated in my reply to the hon. Gentleman
The hon. Member also came back to another subject on which he had put a Parliamentary question, and that is the unfortunate disagreement which appears to have taken place between the Dumbartonshire County Council and the Milngavie Town Council. Under the Air-Raids Precautions Act, 1937, air-raid general precautions schemes fall to be

prepared and submitted by county councils and large burghs in Scotland, but the Secretary of State has power, on the application of a small burgh and after consultation with the county council, to direct a small burgh to prepare a separate scheme. Milngavie did apply to be allowed to prepare a separate scheme under the Act, but after consulting the county council, who objected, the Secretary of State refused the application.
Milngavie is a small burgh with a population of just over 5,000 persons, and the only places in which separate schemes for boroughs or urban districts have been approved in England are large centres like Cambridge, Swindon, and Luton. No small burgh in Scotland apart from Milngavie has applied for permission to submit a separate scheme. I know that the desire for a separate scheme on the part of Milngavie is based on the fear that that burgh would not receive proper consideration, under the county scheme, and it is an unfortunate fact that in this respect the relations between the county and the burgh have apparently been strained for some time. The position is not rendered any easier by the fact that on this subject the relations between the county council and the Glasgow Town Council, who have an interest in the matter, seem to be equally frigid.
Following on the refusal to allow Milngavie to prepare a separate scheme, the county council asked the town council for their scheme, prepared by the burgh previous to the Act, for incorporation in the county scheme. The town council have not complied with that application, and they have not sent a representative to a provisional technical committee which the county council proposed to set up. The position now is that the town council have a statutory duty under Section 1 (2) of the Act to assist the county council in the preparation of a county scheme. When the scheme which is now being prepared by the county council, and which is not yet complete, is referred to the town council, I do not anticipate that the latter will decline to carry out their statutory duty.

Mr. Cassells: Does the hon. Gentleman not know that this scheme has been in the hands of the Milngavie Town Council for weeks now, and that they have refused to have anything at all to do with it; and in these circumstances will


he not, despite the fact that Milngavie is a small burgh, give them the consideration for which I ask?

Mr. Wedderburn: I cannot undertake to allow them to have a separate scheme, but when the hon. Member interrupted me, I was about to say that I hope the burgh will be prepared to co-operate. My right hon. Friend would be very glad to receive a deputation from them at that stage in the hope of seeing whether any reasonable solution can be found, and particularly whether a better relationship can be created between them and the county.
The hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) made a very eloquent speech on the subject of the Highlands and Islands. I am afraid that the only item affecting the Western Highlands and Islands which comes under this Vote is that for £31,000 to meet the cost of transport services. The present position is that the contract with MacBraynes, which was made in 1928, will come to an end on 31st October of this year, and negotiations are now proceeding for a new contract.
The hon. Member for Govan (Mr. Maclean) raised a matter in connection with the Criminal Lunatics (Scotland) Act, 1935, and said that this was the reason why he had moved a reduction of £100 in the Vote. I must do my best, as my right hon. Friend undertook that I would do, to reply to the hon. Member and to keep in order, though it may perhaps be a matter which ought to have been raised on the Prisons Vote. If the hon. Member will look at Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the 1935 Act, he will find:
It shall be lawful for the Department to order the removal to and detention in the criminal lunatic asylum of any person undergoing sentence of penal servitude, preventive detention or imprisonment … in whose case it is certified by two duly qualified medical practitioners that he is insane and that it is advisable that he should be detained in the criminal lunatic asylum rather than in any other asylum.
It is a matter which it is a little difficult to explain, but the position is that at Barlinnie Prison and Perth Prison certificates are normally given by two prison doctors employed at those prisons, and at Edinburgh Prison the certificates are normally given by the prison doctor and by the medical adviser to the Prisons Department. At all other prisons the certification is normally by the prison

doctor and a doctor independent of the prison service. Under the existing law any or all the foregoing certificates can be granted by doctors in the employment of the Prisons Department. When the Criminal Lunatics (Scotland) Act, 1935, comes into operation—and the hon. Member will see from Sub-section (4) of Section 4 that that shall be such date as the Secretary of State may appoint, and will in fact be the date when the new asylum at Lampits is ready for occupation—the existing law will be altered in two important respects. Firstly, while it will remain competent to remove a person from prison to the new criminal lunatic asylum on certificates by two doctors in the employment of the prison authorities, it will be open to that person, or to someone on his behalf, to demand that he be examined by an independent doctor, and the Secretary of State will then be under an obligation to consider the report of any such independent doctor. Secondly, no person will be liable to be detained in the criminal lunatic asylum after the expiry of his sentence, unless one medical certificate is granted by a doctor who is not a salaried officer of the Prisons Department.
I did not attend the Scottish Standing Committee when this Criminal Lunatics (Scotland) Act was going through as a Bill, and I do not remember what was said, but it is evident that there must have been some misapprehension in the hon. Member's mind as to the precise effect, at least in point of time, of the Amendment which he says was introduced partly on his own initiative. With regard to the letter which I wrote to him on the subject, if there is any further point arising out of it on which he still thinks there is ground for misunderstanding, I shall be very glad if he will submit the matter to me again.

9.45 P.m.

Mr. Maclean: I am perfectly clear in my memory about what transpired on the Second Reading and on the Committee stage of this Measure, and later on the Report stage when the Lord Advocate read the Amendment which he put down to meet the point that we had made in the Amendments which we had moved on the Committee stage. We were under the impression then that in getting the concession which we were given we were freeing all individuals, not merely those who were going into this place, but those


who were presently in it, and getting them the right to be examined by a departmental doctor and one doctor who might be the family doctor and would know the history of the case, or some independent outside doctor. It was upon that understanding that we gave that Measure the easy passage that it obtained in 1935. Had we known that the situation was as has now been placed before us, we would have obstructed the Bill until we got what we desired or we would have wrecked it. I again insist that we were misled by the statements that were made to us. I do not say we were misled intentionally; there was probably a lack of understanding between the two sides; but we were misled about what we were receiving in the Amendment that was put before the House by the Lord Advocate. We are now insisting upon that which we were promised in 1935 being made good and upon the rights and liberties of these people protected.

Mr. Wedderburn: All I can do now is to state what is the effect of the Act. It does allow a person to be sent to an asylum on the certificate of two doctors, whether in the employment of the Prisons Department or not. I understand that the position which the hon. Gentleman puts to me is that, whatever the effect of the Act may be, it is inconsistent with the impression which he and others were given in the Debates in Committee when the Measure was going through.

Mr. Maclean: May I put this point? The Under-Secretary has just read a statement showing that it need not necessarily be two doctors of the Prison Department.

During the Debates on the Measure, we were informed by the Lord Advocate that that meant that one of the doctors could be from one of the other Departments and not an outside doctor. What we are insisting on is that it should be an outside doctor.

Mr. Wedderburn: All I can do is to explain what is in the Act. I understand that the hon. Member is now suggesting that the Act is inconsistent with the impression he was given in Committee, and I shall be glad if he will help me to elucidate that matter by referring me to the OFFICIAL REPORTS. I shall be glad to look into it and see whether I can help him in any way or reconcile any inconsistency which may appear to exist.

Mr. Maclean: I will see that the position is placed before the Under-Secretary.

Mr. Wedderburn: The only other hon. Member who has addressed the Committee is my hon. Friend the Member for East Fife (Mr. Henderson Stewart), who made what seemed an attractive suggestion that part of the new building on Calton Hill, Edinburgh, should be used as a residence for the Secretary of State. I am not sure whether he meant that I should be allowed to go there too. Since the Chairman inadvertently referred to this building as a criminal lunatic asylum, I am not at this moment anxious to take up the suggestion.

Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £148,221, be granted for the said Service."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 98; Noes, 157.

Division No. 314.]
AYES.
[9.51 p.m.


Acland, R. T. D. (Barnstaple)
Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)
Hardie, Agnes


Adamson, W. M.
Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)
Harris, Sir P. A,


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)
Dobbie, W.
Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)


Ammon, C. G.
Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)
Henderson, J. (Ardwick)


Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.
Ede, J. C.
Henderson, T. (Tradeston)


Barnes, A. J.
Edwards, A. (Middlesbrough E.)
Hills, A. (Pontefract)


Barr, J.
Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)
Hollins, A.


Batey, J.
Evans, D. O. (Cardigan)
Jagger, J.


Bellenger, F. J.
Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H.
Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)


Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.
Foot, D. M.
Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.


Brown, C. (Mansfield)
Gallacher, W.
Jones, A. C. (Shipley)


Buchanan, G.
Gardner, B. W.
Kelly, W. T.


Burke, W. A.
Garro Jones, G. M.
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.


Cassells, T.
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey)
Kirkwood, D.


Chater, D.
Gibson, R. (Greenock)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. G.


Cluse, W. S.
Green, W. H. (Deptford)
Leach, W.


Cocks, F. S.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.
Leonard, W.


Cove, W. G.
Grenfell, D. R.
Leslie, J. R.


Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford
Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)
McEntee, V. La T.


Daggar, G.
Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)
McGhee, H. G.


Dalton, H.
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
McGovern, J.




MacLaren, A.
Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)


Maclean, N.
Poole, C. C.
Tinker, J. J.


Mathers, G.
Price, M. P.
Tomlinson, G.


Maxton, J.
Quibell, D. J. K.
Viant, S. P.


Messer, F.
Ritson, J.
Walkden, A. G.


Milner, Major J.
Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)
Watkins, F. C.


Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
Salter, Dr. A. (Bermondsey)
Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)


Naylor, T. E.
Seely, Sir H. M
Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)


Oliver, G. H.
Simpson, F. B.
Young, Sir R. (Newton)


Paling, W.
Smith, E. (Stoke)



Parker, J.
Stephen, C.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Parkinson, J. A.
Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)
Mr. Anderson and Mr. Charleton.


Pearson, A.
Stokes, R. R.





NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G, J.
Fleming, E. L.
Petherick, M.


Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)
Furness, S. N.
Pickthorn, K. W. M.


Agnew, Lieut.-Comadr. P. G.
Fyfe, D. P. M.
Ponsonby, Col. C. E.


Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)
Gluckstein, L. H.
Procter, Major H. A.


Anderson, Sir A. Garrett (C. of Ldn.)
Goldie, N. B.
Raikes, H. V. A. M.


Anstruther-Gray, W. J.
Gower, Sir R. V.
Ramsden, Sir E.


Aske, Sir R. W.
Grant-Ferris, R.
Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)


Assheton, R.
Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester)
Rayner, Major R. H.


Atholl, Duohess of
Grimston, R. V.
Reed, A. C. (Exeter)


Baillie, Sir A. W. M.
Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (C'mb'rw'll, N.W.)
Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)


Barclay-Harvey, Sir C. M.
Gunston, Capt. Sir D. W,
Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Hambro, A. V.
Reid, W. Allan (Derby)


Beauchamp, Sir B. C.
Hannah, I. C.
Remer, J. R.


Bossom, A. C.
Hannon, Sir P. J. H.
Rickards, G. W. (Skipton)


Bewer, Comdr. R. T.
Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)
Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)


Boyce, H. Leslie
Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.
Ropner, Colonel L.


Broadbridge, Sir G. T.
Hely-Hutchinson, M. R.
Ross, Major sir R. D. (Londonderry)


Brown, Col. D. C. (Hexham)
Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-
Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)


Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)
Hepworth, J.
Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.


Bull, B. B.
Herbert, Major J. A. (Monmouth)
Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen)


Campbell, Sir E. T.
Holmes, J. S.
Salmon, Sir I.


Cary, R. A.
Hope, Captain Hon. A. O. J.
Salt, E. W.


Castlereagh, Viscount
Hopkinson, A.
Soott, Lord William


Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)
Horsbrugh, Florenoe
Selley, H. R.


Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)
Hume, Sir G. H.
Shakespeare, G. H.


Chapman, Sir S. (Edinburgh, S.)
Hutchinson, G. C.
Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)


Clarry, Sir Reginald
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (S'k N'w'gt'n)
Shepperson, Sir E. W.


Cobb, Captain E. C. (Preston)
Jones, L. (Swansea W.)
Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.


Colville, Rt. Hon. John
Kerr, J. Graham (Scottish Univs.)
Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)


Cooke, J. D. (Hammersmith, S.)
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)
Liddall, W. S.
Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.


Courthope, Col. Rt. Hon. Sir G. L.
Lindsay, K. M.
Spens. W. P.


Cox, H. B. Trevor
Lipson, D. L.
Storey, S.


Craven-Ellis, W.
Llewellin, Colonel J. J.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral, Sir M. F.


Crooke, Sir J. Smedley
Loftus, P. C
Tufnell Lieut.-Commander R. L.


Crookshank, Capt. H. F. C.
Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)
Wakefield, W. W.


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G.
Walker-Smith Sir J.


Cross, R. H.
Macdonald, Capt. P. (Isle of Wight)
Ward Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)


Davidson, Viscountess
Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest
Warrender, Sir V.


De Chair, S. S.
Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.
Waterhouse, Captain C.


Dower, Major A. V. G.
Markham, S. F
Wedderburn, H. J. S.


Dugdale, Captain T. L.
Marsden, Commander A.
Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)


Duggan, H. J,
Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.
Willoughby de Eresby, Lord


Duncan, J. A. L.
Mellor, Sir J. S. P.(Tamworth)
Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchin)


Dunglass, Lord
Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.


Eckersley P. T.
Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)
winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.
Moore, Lleut.-Col. Sir T. C. R.
Wise, A. R.


Elliston, Capt. G. S.
Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Col. J. T. C.
Womersley, Sir W. J. 


Emery, J. F.
Morris, J. P. (Salford, N.)
Young, A. S. L.(Partick)


Emrys-Evans, P. V.
Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)



Errington, E.
Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Everard, W. L.
Munro, P.
Mr. Jameg stuart and Lleut.-


Fildes, Sir H.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh
Colonel Kerr.


Findlay, Sir E.
Patrick, C. M.



Original Question put, and agreed to.

CLASS III.

LAW CHARGES AND COURTS OF LAW, SCOTLAND.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £28,713, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year

ending on the 31st day of March, 1939, for the salaries and expenses of the Lord Advocate's Department, and other law charges, the salaries and expenses of the Courts of Law and Justice and of Pensions Appeals Tribunals in Scotland." [NOTE.—£15,600 has been voted on account.]

10.0 p.m.

Mr. Johnston: I beg to move, to reduce the Vote by £100.
There are one or two matters which come under this Vote about which we on these benches desire an explanation. In the first place, I wish to raise the action taken by or on behalf of procurators-fiscal in Scotland in seeking ordinary folk at their place of business in order to extract from them information, a practice which may result in prejudicing them permanently in the eyes of their superior officers. I believe information in the particular case which I am now raising has been communicated by the Union of Post Office Workers to my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Advocate. Two postmen in Kilmarnock, Ayrshire, apparently enlisted in one of the armies in Spain. Other postmen who evidently were friends of these men, or at least workmates, were visited shortly afterwards by policemen acting on behalf of the local procurator-fiscal. One of the two men was visited at the Post Office. He was asked to come to the postmaster's room, there to be interviewed by a police officer. The other man was visited at his home and interrogated there. Here are some of the questions which, according to the men, were put to them:
Are you a member of any political party?
Why should a question like that be put to a Post Office worker? He was not asked whether he had done anything wrong or broken any law, but whether he was a member of any political party. The second question was:
Did you ever hear Gowans and Milton discuss Spain?
Gowans and Milton are the two men who enlisted. Suppose they had discussed Spain or discussed any other country. What right had the police officer to ask the postman a question of that kind? The third question was:
Who are the persons who form the Communist party in the Post Office?
So far as I know these men did not know who were the Communists, if any, in the Post Office. I am informed that these two men are not Communists.

The Deputy-Chairman (Captain Bourne): I am a little doubtful whether this question can be raised on this Vote. Surely it ought to be raised on the Police Vote.

Mr. Johnston: With due deference, procurators-fiscal come under the Lord

Advocate's Department, and as it was procurator-fiscal in Kilmarnock who authorised the sending of the police officers concerned to make these interrogations, I submit that this is the only occasion on which I can properly raise the question.

The Deputy-Chairman: The point I am not clear about is whether the police acted under the orders of the procurator-fiscal, in which case I agree it would be proper to raise the matter now, or whether the procurator-fiscal merely told them to make inquiries and they acted on their own initiative. In that case, it would be a question of police discipline and would not arise on this Vote.

Mr. Johnston: I took the precaution to be prepared for a question of that kind. The Scottish Office, by letter of 28th February, 1938, admitted that the procurator-fiscal instructed these further inquiries to be made. Let me resume a recital of the questions which are alleged to have been put by the police officers:
Are you a member of any political party?
Did you ever hear Gowans and Milton discuss Spain?
Who are the persons who form the Communist party in the Post Office?
Are you interested in Communism in Spain?
Do you know why Gowans and Milton went there at all?
Did you keep company with Gowans and Milton?
There were other questions asked about Spain and the hostilities there. It is alleged that McGilivray was asked particulars of his name, his address and his Post Office service. He was actually asked if he was married. There are no allegations against this man. It was not alleged and it is not alleged by anyone that this man had broken any Statute. Yet here at his place of business this Crown servant is summoned by the postmaster, at the instance of a police officer, inside the Post Office, to appear in a room in the Post Office, and he is asked these political questions by local police officers, acting, so I am informed, on behalf of the local procurator-fiscal.
Other questions were asked of Riddell, according to his signed statement:
I suppose you know that two postmen are missing from the Post Office?
Can you give any information where they are?


Why should they single you out to send you a postcard?
Why a postcard to you?
What right has a police officer to come to you, to me, or to any citizen and ask why we should get a postcard from somebody abroad, perhaps one for our collection? Further questions asked were:
Were you friendly with them?
Were you in their company after office hours?
Do you know if they attended political meetings?
Do you know if they had any particular views on political questions?
Can you give us any information who is advocating Communist propaganda in the Post Office at Kilmarnock?
There is no one that I know of in this House, with one exception, who is a member of the Communist party. I am not in any shape or form representing the Communist party or the Communist party's views, but these two postmen are citizens, they have citizens' rights, they are Crown servants, and they have all the rights of Crown servants. I submit that if these allegations be proven, if they can be proven, it is a grossly improper act on the part of policemen, sent by the procurator-fiscal, to ask these men political questions at their place of business.

The Deputy-Chairman: The right hon. Gentleman must keep to his charge against the procurator-fiscal; otherwise I must rule him out of order.

Mr. Johnston: I have already stated that the procurator-fiscal instructed further inquiries to be made.

The Deputy-Chairman: Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman does not appreciate the point. So long as he keeps to the point that the procurator-fiscal authorised these questions, then he is responsible and he comes on this Vote. The police do not come on this Vote. If the right hon. Gentleman will keep his charges against the procurator-fiscal, he will be in order.

Mr. Johnston: It is obviously outside my ability to prove that the procurator-fiscal instructed these police officers to put these precise questions. I cannot prove that and nobody will ever be able to prove it. What I can prove is, and I have the letter of the Scottish Office to prove it, that the procurator-fiscal did instruct the police officers to make

inquiries. I am stating that the inquiries they made were of a certain character, and I am entitled to assume that in these circumstances the procurator-fiscal is responsible for the character of the questions put to these men. I do not, however, desire to get at cross purposes with you on this matter. I merely say that on the Lord Advocate's Vote the Lord Advocate is responsible for the administration of justice in Scotland. It is only on this Vote that we can raise issues of this kind, and I am asking, on behalf of the Union of Post Office Workers, on behalf of the men who were interrogated, and on behalf of other Post Office workers in London who recently I understand, have been similarly interrogated, that an inquiry into these specific allegations should be made by the Lord Advocate.
If this sort of thing is allowed to continue then there is an end to the political rights and privileges which remain—goodness knows they are not many—to civil servants in the service of the Crown. I would ask the Lord Advocate to cause an inquiry to be made as to the questions that were asked and as to the responsibility of the procurator-fiscal for those questions. If he is satisfied that the allegations are well founded, I would ask that he will give instructions to procurators-fiscal in Scotland that interrogatories of this nature should not be put to workmen at their place of business, and that in particular political questions of this character will be abandoned.
I know that other hon. Members want to put their points to the Lord Advocate, and I will conclude in a minute. A few days ago I put a question to the Lord Advocate whether he was aware of the case of Lockerbie farm servant who had been accused of acquiring by false pretences a pair of boots valued at 13s. 6d., whether he was aware that the man was haled before the local magistrates for acquiring this 13s. 6d. pair of boots by false pretences, whether he had been sentenced to two months imprisonment without the option of a fine for acquiring the pair of boots, whether it were the case that a local solicitor, on the ground that the sentence was grossly oppressive, appealed to the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh, and whether it was the case that the High Court of Justiciary had unanimously decided that the sentence was oppressive, and had awarded


the poor man seven guineas towards his expenses. I do not think that there is much more to be said about it, except that the poor victim had already served a fortnight of his sentence before the High Court of Justiciary could act and quash the sentence.
I would like the Lord Advocate to tell me how this works. When the High Court awards seven guineas expenses, the payment, I understand from the Lord Advocate, must be met by the ratepayers, they having elected the magistrate. The magistrate gave his decision, advised, for all I know, by a local assessor, and the local ratepayers have to find the seven guineas. So far so good. or so bad, as you like; but suppose the man's expenses are higher and that it has taken him more than seven guineas to fight that oppressive sentence. Suppose he has had to find evidence, and also to find beds for his friends who were witnesses on his behalf, and to go round with the hat to get 10 guineas or 15 guineas in order to fight that oppressive sentence. The High Court, acting possibly in the public interest and with a view to preventing lawyers making a profit out of an appeal case like that, makes an award; is the poor victim to be out of pocket to the extent of seven, eight or perhaps 10 guineas in defending himself, and in securing his release from a sentence which the High Court in Edinburgh decides was oppressive?
I am not suggesting that the Lord Advocate should take power to remove a local magistrate, a sheriff-substitute or a sheriff, nor am I asking for anything that would require legislation. I am asking what protection a citizen has in the case of an oppressive sentence to ensure that he gets an adequate amount towards expenses which he is compelled to incur in order to get relief from an oppressive sentence. With those few words I propose to resume my seat, and I trust that the Lord Advocate will be able to reassure hon. Members on all sides of the Committee that the administration of justice in Scotland will be kept untarnished from the kind of thing which I have described.

The Deputy-Chairman: Before I put the question I should like to say that although I do not quarrel with the right hon. Gentleman's raising the points relating to the

procurator-fiscal, quite obviously the Lord Advocate must deal with his responsibility and not with the responsibility of the police authorities. The right hon. Gentleman is quite justified in raising the point, but we must keep order in relation to the responsibility of the procurator-fiscal.

Mr. Maclean: Is it not the case that in trying to prove the claim upon the procurator-fiscal you must touch upon the question of what the police have been instructed to ask?

The Deputy-Chairman: Precisely, but I want to make it clear that the right hon. Gentleman is putting the blame upon the procurator-fiscal and not on the police.

10.19 p.m.

Mr. Dingle Foot: I wish to draw the attention of the Lord Advocate to a matter which I do not think has been raised in the Committee and that is the report which was issued last year by the Poor Persons' Representation (Scotland) Committee. When that report was issued I put a question to the Secretary of State asking whether he intended to implement the recommendations of the committee, but he very naturally replied that the questions raised were of such complication that considerable time would be needed to study them. I want to ask whether the Lord Advocate can give us any further information whether steps are being taken in pursuance of that report. We shall all agree that the matter is of considerable importance to a large number of people in Scotland. The report deals with the representation of poor persons in both civil and criminal matters. It is interesting to me to observe that the system under which poor persons are represented in Scotland is of very much greater antiquity than the poor persons system in England, and, of course, it works on very different lines.
We occasionally hear in the House criticisms of the legal profession. Of course, I can hardly reply to those criticisms, because I might be an interested party, but it appears from the report, and I think it should be fully realised, that in Scotland an enormous amount of work is done by the legal profession for poor persons, both in civil and in criminal actions, and done without any reward of any kind. I want to draw attention to two of the findings in the report, and also to one or two of the


recommendations. It appears that the number of complaints from poor litigants is very small indeed, because the committee find that, although the work of agents for the poor is burdensome, it is on the whole very well done; but I should like to say a word about the burden which is imposed upon those who have to do it. In paragraph 19 of the report, which refers to outlays, the committee say:
While it is the custom in some districts to ask for 5s. from the poor person to cover outlays in the Sheriff Court in civil cases, there are cases where, if the litigation is to he conducted in a satisfactory manner, the agent for the poor must incur much greater outlay, namely, in postages and travelling, apart from ordinary office expenses. This happens both in civil and criminal cases, and not infrequently the expense is met by the solicitor concerned out of his own pocket. In appeals from the Sheriff Court to the Court of Session, moreover, no provision is made at present for defraying the costs of duplicating or copying evidence and records for the use of judges of the Appeal Court. If the poor person cannot find the money, the solicitor concerned is left to pay, or the appeal cannot proceed.
I think we shall all agree that that is a serious state of affairs. In the next paragraph the committee say:
There can be no doubt that a solicitor appointed to serve on the Poor's Roll must suffer great inroads upon his time, and the burden is often so serious as to be discharged only at the expense of his private practice.
That, of course, also happens in England, but in England greater provision is made in order to meet the expense inevitably incurred, and I think it must follow that, in some respects at any rate, poor litigants are bound to be better served. I do not want to pursue this issue at any length, but I want to draw the attention of the Committee to one or two outstanding recommendations in the report. First of all, in dealing with the Sheriff Court, the committee make this recommendation:
An annual grant should be given by the Treasury to the General Council of Solicitors in Scotland for the purpose of defraying expenses and outlays in connection with legal assistance for the poor in civil matters.
This would bring Scotland into line with England in regard to these matters. In dealing with criminal courts, the committee make a recommendation which seems to me to be of great importance. They say, under the heading of Police Courts:
It should be the duty of the local authority in large towns to provide out of local funds a Public Defensor for poor persons accused before police courts.

I observe that in an earlier part of the report it is stated that in two cities in Scotland, Edinburgh and Dundee, the local authority already makes a small provision—I think £30 or £50—in order to provide for the defence of poor persons in the police courts, but apparently that is only done in Edinburgh and Dundee, and no one supposes that sums of that magnitude could possibly provide for the defence of any considerable number of poor persons coming before tribunals of that character. The committee go on to make this recommendation in regard to the sheriff courts:
Provision should be made for the granting of legal aid to poor persons in cases where a sentence of imprisonment may be imposed and for payment of outlays and modified fees on certification by the sheriff.
If a recommendation of that kind were carried it would, again, only be bringing Scotland in line with England, where already provision can be made for the defence of poor persons who have no means to provide for their own defence. Very small fees are paid. I do not think either branch of the legal profession makes much profit out of it, but it means that the inevitable office expenses of the solicitors are covered; so it does very much facilitate the proper defence of poor persons in England who are tried on indictment. This introduces a very similar system in the case of the sheriff courts in Scotland. In regard to the High Courts, the report recommends:
Judges should have power to certify for payment of outlays and modified fees.
Much the same thing as applies in the case of sheriff courts applies in that case. I am not saying that all these recommendations are necessarily the best methods that could be adopted, but it does appear that the present system in Scotland, although it may be of very great antiquity, does put a very considerable burden on the legal profession, and that we could make some improvement in the provision made for the representation of poor persons both in civil and criminal matters. It would be a good thing if the Lord Advocate could give us some information as to what is being done for the defence of poor persons in Scotland.

10.27 p.m.

Mr. McGovern: The first matter I wish to raise is the case of a boy who was arrested in Linlithgow one Sunday


evening while cycling without a light. He was booked by the police. After being booked, he had to get to his home in Shettleston. He was delayed by a serious puncture. Outside Shettleston he was again booked. He was booked by two different sets of authorities. He was summoned by fiscal No. 1, and his father wrote to the fiscal and said that if he had to appear in court it would mean that the boy would lose a day's work and incur 3s. or 4s. expenses. He said that if a plea of guilty was accepted he would send on the fine. The fiscal said he could not accept that plea, and that a legal representative had been appointed to defend the boy. The fine was 7s. 6d. and the fee for the lawyer was 5s., and accordingly he wrote for 12s. 6d.
When the case was brought to my notice by the father the second summons had arrived. When the second summons arrived the fiscal was the lawyer who had previously defended the boy and been paid 5s. This fiscal was prepared to put it in the hands of the other lawyer to defend him. Both fiscals became defending lawyers. I do not expect the Lord Advocate to give me a complete reply on this matter. I would prefer him to investigate. I wrote to fiscal No. 2 and pointed out that the boy had been defended by him previously and had been fined, and I enclosed a copy of the letter showing that he had paid the 5s. After the court met he intimated to me that he had withdrawn the No. 2 case. But it appeared to me to be a terrible state of affairs that a fiscal in the course of his duty is going to engage a lawyer for the boy, and that in turn both fiscals should become defending lawyers. Something needs to be done, and I am prepared to place the entire facts in the hands of the Lord Advocate without giving names to-night.
The second matter is one that I have raised continuously in this House with the Lord Advocate, in which a large number of cases have been placed in the hands of the fiscal, relating to court decisions given to a man in my area, a debt collector who is living as a bird of prey upon the poor by continuously taking from these people their books when they have paid a proportion of the money and putting down false sums. He often asks the people to leave the books with him and to call for them the following week.

I know of cases where people have paid £7 or £8 for a simple debt of 25s. In no case can they get out of the hands of this man. I had the experience of going to the man and offering him out of the Lord Provosts' fund the entire sum of 25s. to clear a woman's account, but he refused to accept it because, he said, he would only accept from the woman a shilling a week. In no case will he allow a person to get out of his clutches. One of these women fainted on my door step and a surgeon had to be called to her, as the Lord Advocate knows, and she had to be accompanied home in a bad state of collapse.
This man publishes answers of the Lord Advocate in his window, and says that neither the hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) nor the Lord Advocate can get anything on him. Continual reports have been given to the authorities, and I am astounded that this man is so persistently able to flout the law. He is doing that and getting away with it. I regret that when I went to see him I did not physically assault him in order to get the case brought into court to show the man in his true light. I can assure the Lord Advocate and this Committee that, if I am compelled to go again, this House and the country will hear of the incidents in relation to it. I want to know whether action will be taken against bogus people living on poor people in this way. The Lord Advocate should apply his mind to this matter in order to place the collecting of debts in the hands of more respectable firms and cut out men of this description.
I wish to raise a question in relation to untried prisoners in the Glasgow Central Police Office. It came out in the High Court recently that a man on a very serious charge had been taken from his cell, which was in the building in which the detectives were housed, on two or three occasions during the night and examined by detectives without any other person being present, the statements which he made being produced in the High Court. These statements, I believe, were obtained by an illegal interview. I know that it has been stated that the detectives are in a different building, but that is not true. I would ask the Lord Advocate to visit these buildings himself and see how the law is being carried out. It is his duty to defend untried prisoners and see that they get every opportunity of presenting their case in the best possible light and that


an unfair advantage is not taken of them by the police. I myself was taken on two occasions from my cell in the Central Police Station by detectives to a private room. That, I say, is illegal, and if the Lord Advocate cares to visit the building and desires the company of Members of various parties in the House of Commons, I am sure they will be delighted to accompany him. I say that when people are arrested they should be committed to Barlinnie Prison and not detained in the same buildings where detectives have complete access to them before trial.
The last matter to which I want to refer is the rent courts. Where the rent courts are in force in Glasgow the sheriffs give practically no examination at all to the cases which come before them.

The Deputy-Chairman: The hon. Member cannot raise the question of the rent courts on this Vote.

Mr. McGovern: This is a matter which concerns the procurator-fiscal, and I want to suggest that people who have to attend these courts are not given a proper opportunity to defend themselves, that a better means of defence ought to be allowed to them and that a proper examination of the case presented to the court should take place. They are given decisions the effect of which they do not understand, and I think that the decision should be conveyed to them in writing so that they will know what the decision means. Finally, there is a system in Glasgow, I do not know whether it obtains anywhere else, of police fiscals. I do not think that they should be allowed to operate, because they are people interested in prosecuting the charge against an individual, and, therefore, are completely biased in every way. I suggest that proper fiscals should be appointed, such as you have in the Central Police Court, who are free from police interference. I have put my questions as briefly as possible and I hope the Lord Advocate will give his usual sympathetic consideration to them.

10.38 p.m.

Mr. Cassells: I desire to associate myself with the complaint which the right hon. Member for West Stirling (Mr. Johnston) made in connection with the two matters to which he referred. It certainly appears to me that in so far

as the responsibilities of the procurator-fiscal are concerned, if on his instructions these police officers proceeded to the place of employment of the Post Office employés for the purpose of interrogating them then from a strictly legal point of view he is liable on the legal doctrine of Qui facit per alium facit per se, and must be compelled to accept responsibility. I think it is proper and fitting that it should come from this Committee that in no circumstances are witnesses legally compelled to furnish precognitions of any sort to the procurator-fiscal or police officers. I also wish to associate myself with the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Foot) in his point concerning the unfortunate position of poor persons engaged in litigation in the courts of Scotland. There are many things in Scotland of which we are proud, but speaking as a member of the legal profession I echo the sentiments of the profession as a whole when I say that we are disturbed as to the position of poor litigants. I trust that the Lord Advocate will look into the matter.
The point with which I want to deal particularly is the case referred to by the right hon. Member for West Stirling, which was heard in the Jedburgh court. As far as the seven guineas are concerned I suppose it is a payment which must automatically fall on local rates. But there is far more than that in this matter. This sort of thing is happening repeatedly in all the inferior courts of Scotland. I will give two typical illustrations. In the Sheriff Court in Stirlingshire, an accused person was charged with a contravention of Section 12 of the Road Traffic Act. He pleaded not guilty, his case went to trial, he was convicted after trial, he was fined £5, his licence was endorsed and suspended for a period of one month. Thereafter, application was made for a stated case in order to take the matter on appeal to the Justiciary in Edinburgh. The man was not in any great financial position; he was an ordinary workman who was able to afford a motor cycle. Immediately he applied for a stated case, he was called upon by the court to find caution.
The question of caution is a matter which is entirely outside the question of paying the solicitor's or the counsel's expenses. The sum of £10, or thereabouts, was fixed, and the man had to put that down. When the case went to Justiciary,


he was compelled to enlist the services of counsel. There was a total expenditure on that case of about £30 or £40. The astonishing feature of the case was that it was quite clear that there had been a mistake made in the conviction in the first instance, and actually when the case was called in Justiciary, Crown counsel got up before defence counsel, and stated that, in the light of the stated facts, there was absolutely no case against the accused and that accordingly the conviction should be quashed. The Court of Appeal sustained the appeal, and again the modified fee of seven guineas was allowed. I am not appealing to the right hon. and learned Gentleman from any professional or personal point of view. I maintain that in that case, when the man ultimately went to his agent and was faced with the bill of expenses, his immediate reaction was that, from his point of view, he would have been far better off if he had paid the £5 fine, and allowed his licence to be suspended for the period of one month. At the end, he was out of pocket.
Then there was the case with which the hon. and learned Gentleman the Solicitor-General for Scotland dealt last week in Justiciary, the case of a man who was convicted in the Sheriff Court at Falkirk for reset of theft and sentenced to three months' imprisonment. A stated case was applied for immediately, and immediately the application was made, the court called upon the man to find caution for expenses, and in that instance caution was fixed at no less than £30. The man was an ordinary workman and the only way in which he was able to find the £30 was by getting his friends to sell almost all their goods and chattels. The appeal went on. I understand that the hon. and learned Gentleman took the appeal for the Crown. The conviction was quashed, and again the modified fee of seven guineas was allowed. I say that the system is absolutely iniquitous and preposterous, and that justice is absolutely stultified and negatived in our country. When a person has been convicted, the first thing he asks the solicitor is, "How much is it going to cost; how much is the appeal going to cost?" The right hon. and learned Gentleman may speak as long as he likes about applying in forma pauperis—it does not matter a bit.
In the light of all the circumstances that have been placed before the Committee in this connection, I say that the right hon. and learned Gentleman ought to pay regard to this matter. It may be that the right hon. and learned Gentleman will say that the appeal judges are entitled, in their wisdom, to modify the expenses and that, if any suggestion emanating from these benches is to bear fruit, it will require legislation. I do not agree, but I hope the complaints which have been voiced to-night will receive attention.

10.46 p.m.

The Lord Advocate (Mr. T. M. Cooper): The time at my disposal is so short that I must, as briefly as I can, answer the questions raised by hon. Members. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Stirling (Mr. T. Johnston) raised the case of the two postmen in Kilmarnock. I accept responsibility for that matter and therefore no question arises as to the propriety of raising it here. The incident took place in October, 1937, and about that time, following upon questions which were raised from certain quarters, the matter was examined by me. The position was that the authorities were approached by the parents of two post office officials in Kilmarnock who were missing and who, as a result of certain inquiries, were thought to have gone to Spain to engage in the Spanish War, on one side or the other—I do not know which. A complaint eventually reached the procuratorfiscal who, after examining the information in his possession, instructed the police to make further inquiries with a view to tracing where the men had gone, having in view the fact that under the Foreign Enlistment Act, it is an offence to engage actively in the hostilities which are taking place in Spain. The Committee will recall that about that time many references were made in Parliament to the Foreign Enlistment Act and various other statutory measures taken in pursuance of the non-intervention policy.
The inquiries which the police made, according to the report I have received, did not include the objectionable questions to which the right hon. Gentleman referred. I have a note here—I have not time to read it in full—of all the questions which were asked, but I may put it


briefly by saying that none of the questions related to the political views either of the person questioned or of the missing men. The questions were all directed to ascertaining the whereabouts of the missing men and the possibility of their having committed an infringement of the Foreign Enlistment Act. Reference was made to the alleged impropriety of the questioning taking place on Post Office premises. In the case of one man, the questioning did take place on the Post Office premises, with the consent of the superior Post Office official in charge of the premises.
The view which I put to the Committee with regard to the whole incident is this: The police were carrying out a general instruction. I cannot say what the exact, precise terms of the instruction were, because that is not now ascertainable but I cannot for a moment imagine that the procurator-fiscal would ever dream of dictating the questions he wanted to be asked. He gave a general instruction for inquiries to be made on certain lines. Those inquiries were made on the procurator-fiscal's instructions, following a report made to him of a case which required investigation from a double standpoint—first, to ascertain the whereabouts of the men, and, second, with a view to determining whether an offence had been committed against the Foreign Enlistment Act.
The second point I would make is that, while I fully recognise and respect the rights of citizens in all the matters to which the right hon. Gentleman referred, every good citizen has the duty to assist the authorities in the detection and suppression of any offences against the law, and I hope every good citizen would render that assistance willingly and readily. Further, any person having knowledge of the commission of an offence can be taken before the Sheriff and questioned on oath, a plain indication by Statute that Parliament has in the past recognised the duty laid on the citizen to assist the authorities in matters of this kind. If, therefore, I am right, as my information justifies me in thinking I am, that none of the objectionable questions of the kind referred to by the right hon. Gentleman were asked and that all the questions asked were closely germane to a proper investigation being made by the authorities, I think the Committee will agree that the incident does not justify

the criticisms that the right hon. Gentleman has made.
In their efforts to carry out their very difficult and often thankless duties the authorities, as I know well, are most anxious to carry them out in the manner most convenient to the persons concerned, but it would not be possible in the public interest to lay down any such general rule as the right hon. Gentleman suggested, that persons should not be questioned or asked for information in their places of employment. Experience shows that, if a person does not wish to speak to the police or to give information, he will find fault with the police whether they ask for it at his home or at his work or wherever it may be. Having regard to the wide range of responsibilities which may arise in relation to the commission of crimes and offences, the police and the criminal authorities for whom I am answerable must retain a discretion, to be wisely exercised, to make inquiries where and when necessity may demand.
The right hon. Gentleman referred in the second place to the question of expenses in criminal appeals or other forms of process by which criminal proceedings are brought for review before the High Court of Justiciary. When these cases are brought before the court they have to exercise a power conferred upon them by this House by the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1908, to award such expenses as they may think fit. Accordingly I feel bound to say that all that has been said upon this topic has been, inevitably, criticism of the Supreme Court in the exercise of a judicial power conferred upon them by Statute. It would be improper for me either to support or to criticise the action of the court in any individual case, but I can assure the Committee that the court in every case are giving effect to their judicial views on the proper method of dealing with the case, and, that being so, and the discretion being left to the court, I feel that it is impossible for me to go further in the matter. As to the amount of expenses, the figure is given as a sufficient figure to cover what the court considers are the proper expenses of the appellants, and in some cases full expenses are given. In all cases the act is one of judicial discretion.
The hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Foot) asked me about the poor persons' representation and the report of the com-


mittee on the subject which was issued some time ago. He will not expect me to enter into any extent into that highly controversial problem, but may I say two things? I think the Committee will recognise, as I do myself as a member of the profession, that the Scottish legal profession are well entitled to the respect and thanks of the community as a whole for the work which they have done literally for hundreds of years gratuitously, and indeed often at their own expense, in performing civil and criminal work for those who are not able to pay for it. The fact that no action has yet been taken on that committee's report must not be accepted by the Committee as any indication that it has been pigeon-holed or shelved. On the contrary, the topic is one on which I think the Committee will agree it is very desirable that any action which is taken should be taken with the full assent of the profession as a whole. It is not a matter in regard to which anyone would desire to impose conditions against the wishes of the great bulk of the profession. As a matter of fact I am at this moment in consultation with certain representatives of the legal profession in Scotland on the topic, and while I cannot indicate what the final result will be, I can assure the Committee that the matter has been, in the last few days, actively under my consideration.
The hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. McGovern) raised a number of points.

In the first place, I shall be happy to look into the question of the Linlithgow fiscal to which he referred, but in fairness to my own Department may I say that, from his narrative of the case, it is plain to me that the fiscal in question cannot be a fiscal covered by this Vote. It must be a reference to some minor fiscal. As regards debt collectors in Glasgow, I shall mention no names, but the question has been before my attention for some time, and I received a deputation only a few weeks ago with reference to it. Action has been taken in certain of these cases successfully, and I can only leave the matter on this footing, that the activities of certain of those firms which have been referred to have attracted the attention of the criminal authorities and will continue to do so as long as certain of the operations in which they have been engaged are continued. The hon. Member also referred to the rent court and to the appointment of police fiscals in Glasgow, but I fear that neither of those topics falls within my province. In particular, the appointment of police fiscals would be a matter for the local authorities and not in any way one for the consideration of the Lord Advocate's Department.

Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £28,613, be granted for the said Service."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 100; Noes, 181.

Division No. 315.]
AYES.
[11.0p.m.


Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)
Gallacher, W.
McGhee, H. G.


Ammon, C. G.
Gardner, B. W.
McGovern, J.


Anderson, F. (Whitehaven)
Garro Jones, G. M.
MacLaren, A.


Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.
Gibson, R. (Greenock)
Maclean, N.


Banfield, J. W.
Green, W. H. (Deptford)
Maxton, J.


Barnes, A. J.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.
Milner, Major J.


Barr, J,
Grenfell, D. R.
Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)


Batey, J.
Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)
Oliver, G. H.


Bellenger, F. J.
Groves, T. E.
Paling, W.


Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W.
Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)
Parker, J.


Benson, G.
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Parkinson, J. A.


Brown, C. (Mansfield)
Hardie, Agnes
Pearson, A.


Buchanan, G.
Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)
Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Burke, W. A.
Henderson, J. (Ardwick)
Pritt, D. N.


Cassells, T.
Henderson, T. (Tradeston)
Quibell, D. J. K


Chater, D.
Hills, A. (Pontefract)
Riley, B.


Cluse, W. S.
Hollins, A.
Ritson, J.


Cocks, F. S.
Jagger, J.
Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)


Cove, W. G.
Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)
Salter, Dr. A. (Bermondsey)


Cripps, Hon. Sir Stafford
Johnston, Rt. Hon. T.
Silkin, L.


Daggar, G.
Jones, A. C. (Shipley)
Simpson, F. B.


Dalton, H.
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)


Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.
Smith, E. (Stoke)


Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)
Kirkwood, D.
Smith, T. (Normanton)


Dobbie, W.
Lathan, G.
Sorensen, R. W.


Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)
Lawson, J. J.
Stephen, C.


Ede, J. C.
Leach, W.
Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)


Edwards, A. (Middlesbrough E.)
Leonard, W.
Stokes, R. R.


Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwallty)
Leslie, J. R.
Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)


Fletcher, Lt,-Comdr. R. T. H.
McEntee. V. La T.
Thurtle, E.




Tinker, J. J.
Watkins, F. C.
Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)


Tomlinson, G.
Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)
Young, Sir R. (Newton)


Viant, S. P.
Williams, T. (Don Valley)



Walkden, A. G.
Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—




Mr. Mathers and Mr. Adamson.




NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.
Entwistle, Sir C. F.
Moore, Lieut.-Col. Sir T. C. R.


Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.)
Errington, E.
Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)


Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G.
Evans, D. O. (Cardigan)
Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)


Allen, Col. J. Sandeman (B'knhead)
Fildes, Sir H.
Munro, P.


Anderson, Sir A. Garrett (C. of Ldn.)
Findlay, Sir E.
Nicolson, Hon. H. G.


Anstruther-Gray, W. J.
Fleming, E. L.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh


Apsley, Lord
Foot, D. M.
Patrick, C. M,


Aske, Sir R. W.
Fremantle, Sir F. E.
Petherick, M.


Assheton, R.
Furness, S. N.
Pickthorn, K. W. M.


Baillie, Sir A. W. M.
Fyfe, D. P. M.
Ponsonby, Col. C. E.


Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey)
Procter, Major H. A.


Barclay-Harvey, Sir C. M.
Gluckstein, L. H.
Raikes, H. V. A. M.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T, P. H.
Goldie, N. B.
Ramsay, Captain A. H. M.


Beauchamp, Sir B. C.
Gower, Sir R. V.
Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)


Bossom, A. C.
Grant-Ferris, R.
Reed, A. C. (Exeter)


Bower, Comdr. R. T.
Greene, W. P. C (Worcester)
Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)


Boyce, H. Leslie
Grimston, R. V.
Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)


Briscoe, Capt. R. G.
Guest, Hon. I. (Brecon and Radnor)
Reid, W. Allan (Derby)


Broadbridge, Sir G. T.
Guest, Mai. Hon. O. (C'mb'rw'll, N.W.)
Remer, J. R.


Brown, Col. D. C. (Hexham)
Gunston, Capt. D. W.
Rickards, G. W. (Skipton)


Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)
Hambro, A. V.
Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)


Bull, B. B.
Hannah, I. C.
Ropner, Colonel L.


Burghley, Lord
Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton)
Ross, Major Sir R. D. (Londonderry)


Campbeil, Sir E. T.
Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.
Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)


Carver, Major W. H.
Hely-Hutchinson, M. R.
Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.


Cary, R. A.
Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-
Russell, S. H. M. (Darwen)


Castiereagh, Viscount
Hepworth, J.
Salmon, Sir I.


Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)
Herbert, Major J. A. (Monmouth)
Salt, E. W.


Channon, H.
Holmes, J. S.
Scott, Lord William


Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)
Hopkinson, A.
Seely, Sir H. M.


Chapman, Sir S. (Edinburgh, S.)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)
Selley, H. R.


Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead)
Hume, Sir G. H.
Shakespeare, G. H


Clarry, Sir Reginald
Hutchinson, G. C.
Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)


Clydesdale, Marquess of
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (S'k N'w'gt'n)
Shepperson, Sir E. W.


Cobb, Captain E. C. (Preston)
Jones, L. (Swansea W.)
Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.


Colville, Rt. Hon. John
Keeling, E. H.
Spens, W. P.


Cooke, J. D. (Hammersmith, S.)
Kerr, J. Graham (Scottish Univs.)
Storey, S.


Cooper, Rt. Hn. T. M. (E'nburgh, W.)
Kimball, L.
Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)


Courthope, Col. Rt. Hon. Sir G. L.
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Cox, H. B. Trevor
Law, R. K. (Hull, S.W.)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Sir M. F.


Craven-Ellis, W.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Thomson, Sir J. D. W.


Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page
Lennox-Boyd, A. T. L.
Tufnell, Liaut.-Commander R. L.


Crooke, Sir J. Smedley
Liddall, W. S.
Wakefield, W. W.


Crookshank, Capt. H. F. C.
Lindsay, K. M.
Walker-Smith, Sir J.


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Lipson, D. L.
Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan


Cross, R. H.
Llewellin, Colonel J. J.
ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)


Davidson, Viscountess
Lloyd, G. W.
Warrender, Sir V.


De Chair, S. S.
Loftus, P. C.
Waterhouse, Captain C.


Dower, Major A. V. G.
Lyons, A. M.
Wedderburn, H. J. S.


Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)
Mabane, W. (Huddersfield)
Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)


Dugdale, Captain T. L.
MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G.
Willoughby de Eresby, Lord


Duggan, H. J.
Macdonald, Capt. P. (Isle of Wight)
Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir A. T. (Hitchin)


Duncan, J. A. L.
McEwen, Capt. J. H. F.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.


Dunglass, Lord
McKie, J. H.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Eastwood, J. F.
Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest
Wise, A. R.


Eckersley, P. T.
Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon H. D. R.
Womersley, Sir W. J.


Edmondson, Major Sir J.
Markham, S. F.
Young, A. S. L. (Partick)


Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.
Marsden, Commander A.



Elliston, Capt. G. S.
Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Emery, J. F.
Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth)
Captain Hope and Lieut.-Colonel


Emmott, C. E. G. C.
Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)
Kerr.


Emrys-Evans, P. V.
Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick)



Question, "That this House do now adjourn," put, and agreed to.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow; Committee to sit again To-morrow.

NAVY, ARMY, AND AIR EXPENDITURE, 1936.

Resolutions reported:
1. Whereas it appears by the Navy Appropriation Account for the year ended the 31st

day of March, 1937, that the aggregate expenditure on Navy Services has not exceeded the aggregate sums appropriated for those Services, and that, as shown in the Schedule hereto appended, the net surplus of the Exchequer Grants for Navy Services over the net Expenditure is £312,975 18s. 4d., namely:

£
s.
d.


Total Surpluses
920,322
14
3


Total Deficits
607,346
55
11


Net Surplus
£312,975
18
4

And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Navy Services as is necessary to make good

SCHEDULE.


No. of Vote.
Navy Services, 1936,Votes
Deficits.
Surpluses.


Excesses of actual over estimated gross Expemditure.
Deficievcies of actual as compared withestimated Receipts.
Surpluses of estimated over actual gross Expenditure.
Surplses of actual as compared with estimated Receipts.




£
s.
d.
£
s.
d.
£
s.
d.
£
s.
d.


1
Wages, etc., of Offcers, Seamen, Boys, and Royal Marines, and Civilians employed on Fleet Services.
88,734
0
7
—
—
6,375
9
1


2
Victualling and Clothing
—
—
1,800
12
10
8,459
3
7


3
Medical Establishments and Services.
15,446
5
10
—
—
12.874
5
0


4
Fleet Air Arm
—
—
—
—


5
Educational Services
2,662
16
9
—
—
1,789
14
7


6
Scientific Services
—
—
8,212
16
10
9,211
7
11


7
Royal Naval Reserves
—
59
17
1
25,781
15
4
—


8
Shipbuilding, Repairs, Maintenance, etc.:



Sec.1. Personnel
51,148
9
4
—
—
14,897
15
11



Sec. 2. Matériel
—
117,891
9
9
111,190
6
8
—



Sec. 3. Contract Work
255,222
3
9
—
—
18,970
15
9


9
Naval Armaments
—
—
453,480
2
5
10,792
17
7


10
Works, Buildings, and Repairs.
—
—
128,053
16
6
5,356
7
6


11
Miscellaneous Effective Services.
39,484
6
8
—
—
16,660
1
5


12
Admiralty Office
26,275
18
7
—
—
1,739
13
0


13
Non-Effective Services(Naval and Marine), Officers.
—
—
58,652
19
2
1,201
17
11


14
Non-Effective Services (Naval and Marine), Men.
—
1,252
19
7
15,117
14
11
—


15
Civil Superannuation,Com pensation Allowances, and Gratuities.
—
70
5
1
9,703
0
4
—


—
Balances irrecoverable and Claims abandoned.
9,098
2
11
—
—
—




488,072
4
5
119,274
11
6
811,993
5
0
108,329
9
3




Total Deficits
£607,346
15
11
Total Surpluses
£920,322
14
5




Net Surplus
£312,975
18
4

II. Whereas it appears by the Army Appropriation Account for the year ended the 31st day of March, 1937, that the aggregate Expenditure on Army Services has not exceeded the aggregate sums appropriated for those Services and that, as shown in the Schedule hereto appended, the net surplus of the

the said total deficits on other Grants for Navy Services.

1. "That the application of such sums he sanctioned."

Exchequer Grants for Army Services over the net Expenditure is £1,686,011 os. 2d., namely:



£
s.
d.


Total Surpluses
1,948,499
1
3


Total Deficits
262,488
1
1


Net Surplus
£1,686,011
0
2

And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Army Services as is necessary to make good

SCHEDULE.


No. of Vote.
Navy Services, 1936,Votes
Deficits.
Surpluses.


Excesses of actual over estimated gross Expemditure.
Deficievcies of actual as compared withestimated Receipts.
Surpluses of estimated over actual gross Expenditure.
Surplses of actual as compared with estimated Receipts.




£
s.
d.
£
s.
d.
£
s.
d.
£
s.
d.


1
Wages, etc., of Offcers, Seamen, Boys, and Royal Marines, and Civilians employed on Fleet Services.
88,734
0
7
—
—
6,375
9
1


2
Victualling and Clothing
—
—
1,800
12
10
8,459
3
7


3
Medical Establishments and Services.
15,446
5
10
—
—
12.874
5
0


4
Fleet Air Arm
—
—
—
—


5
Educational Services
2,662
16
9
—
—
1,789
14
7


6
Scientific Services
—
—
8,212
16
10
9,211
7
11


7
Royal Naval Reserves
—
59
17
1
25,781
15
4
—


8
Shipbuilding, Repairs, Maintenance, etc.:



Sec.1. Personnel
51,148
9
4
—
—
14,897
15
11


Sec. 2. Matériel
—
117,891
9
9
111,190
6
8
—



Sec. 3. Contract Work
255,222
3
9
—
—
18,970
15
9


9
Naval Armaments
—
—
453,480
2
5
10,792
17
7


10
Works, Buildings, and Repairs.
—
—
128,053
16
6
5,356
7
6


11
Miscellaneous Effective Services.
39,484
6
8
—
—
16,660
1
5


12
Admiralty Office
26,275
18
7
—
—
1,739
13
0


13
Non-Effective Services(Naval and Marine), Officers.
—
—
58,652
19
2
1,201
17
11


14
Non-Effective Services (Naval and Marine), Men.
—
1,252
19
7
15,117
14
11
—


15
Civil Superannuation,Com pensation Allowances, and Gratuities.
—
70
5
1
9,703
0
4
—


—
Balances irrecoverable and Claims abandoned.
9,098
2
11
—
—
—




488,072
4
5
119,274
11
6
811,993
5
0
108,329
9
3




Total Deficits
£607,346
15
11
Total Surpluses
£920,322
14
5




Net Surplus
£312,975
18
4

III. Whereas it appears by the Air Appro priation Account for the year ended the 31st Total day of March, 1937, that the aggregate Expenditure on Air. Services has not exceeded the aggregate sums appropriated for those Services and that, as shown in the Schedule hereto appended, the net surplus of the Exchequer Grants for Air Services over the net Expenditure is £704,403 8s. 1d., namely:

the said total deficits on other Grants for Air Services.

2. "That the application of such sums be sanctioned."

£
s.
d.


Total Surpluses
…
758,189
17
8


Total Deficits
…
53,786
9
7


Net Surplus
…
£704,403
8
1

And whereas the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have temporarily authorised the application of so much of the said total surpluses on certain Grants for Air Services as is necessary to make good

the said totaldeficits on other Grsnts for Air Services.

SCHEDULE.


No. of Vote.
Army Services, 1936,Votes.
Deficits.
Surpluses.


Excesses of actual over estimated gross Expemditure.
Deficiencies of actual as compared with estimated Receipts.
Surpluses of estimated over actual gross Expenditure.
Surplses of actual as compared with estimated Receipts.




£
s.
d.
£
s.
d.
£
s.
d.
£
s.
d.


1
Pay, etc., of the Royal Air Force.
—
—
103,915
1
8
5,990
14
7


2
Quartering, Stores (except Technical), Supplies, and Transportation.
—
—
1,948
6
1
6,486
6
1


3
Technical and Warlike Stores (including Experimental and Research Services).
—
—
39,241
16
4
34,732
13
8


4
Works, Buildings, and Lands.
—
—
187,125
4
3
2,484
0
1


5
Medical Services
20,607
18
0
—
—
12,092
19
5


6
Technical Training and Educational Services.
—
589
14
10
6,549
18
2
—


7
Auxiliary and Reserve Forces.
—
37
6
11
102,082
4
3
—


8
Civil Aviation
—
28,920
5
0
187,044
5
3
—


9
Meteorological and Miscellaneous Effective Services
—
—
19,408
12
9
3,953
13
10


10
Air Ministry
—
—
12,174
11
11
3,471
7
2


11
Half-Pay, Pensions, and other Non-effective Services.
—
1,357
8
8
29,488
2
2
—


—Balances irrecoverable and Claims abandoned.
2,273
16
2
—
—
—




22,88l
14
2
30,904
15
5
688,978
2
10
69,211
14
10




Total Deficits
£53,786
9
7
Total Surpluses
£758,189
17
8




Net Surplus
£704,403
8
1

BRITISH MUSEUM [Money].

GAS UNDERTAKINGS ACTS, 1920 TO 1934.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 to 1934, on the application of the Mayor,

3. "That the application of such sums be sanctioned."

Aldermen and Burgesses of the borough of St. Helens, which was presented on the 30th day of June and published, be approved."

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 to 1934, on the application of the urban district council of Rothwell (Northampton), which was presented on the 30th day of June and published, be approved.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 to 1934, on the application of the British Gas Light Company, Limited, with respect to the Hull undertaking of that Company, which was presented on the 30th day of June and published, be approved."—[Mr. Cross.]

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

LIVESTOCK MARKET, BUNGAY.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That this House do now adjourn."— [Captain Hope.]

11. 13 p.m.

Mr. Loftus: I desire to raise, in the few minutes at my disposal, the question of the action of the Livestock Commission in closing down the livestock market at the market town of Bungay, in Suffolk. Bungay is a small town of 3,000 population and the centre of a purely agricultural district, where the farms are almost entirely small holdings. The town itself is of considerable historic interest. It was the seat of the Earls of Norfolk, and there are still the ruins of a great castle there. It has one further distinction that it is the only town in England that retains the town reeve, the old Saxon officials who were succeeded by the mayor and corporation. On 4th July I put a question to the Minister of Agriculture, and he stated that:
No market was in operation at Bungay between 1900 and 1929 
That statement is denied by everybody in the district. It is true that a market was not held on the present site, but a market was held a mile or so away, at least so I am very definitely informed, and local opinion is urging that there shall be an inquiry into the whole circumstances of the case, when these facts will be ascertained at the inquiry. Then the Minister said:
Very few livestock sales took place during the period between 1929 to 1937".—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 4th July, 1938; col. 26, Vol. 338.]
I am again informed very definitely that that is not the case and that there were livestock sales between those years.
Finally, comes the statement that no livestock sales took place during the period referred to in Section 14 of the Act, in the year ending 30th November, 1936. As the House knows, if a market had no livestock sale in that year, the Livestock Commission could, under Section 14 of the Act, close down the market and, acting under that Section, they have closed down the market in this case; but the local authorities claim that a sale was advertised. They have found an advertisement in a local paper of 14th May, 1936.
The market has passed through various vicissitudes. It was controlled from 1929

to 1936 by a firm of auctioneers who also had a market in another market town seven miles away, and they discouraged the market and concentrated their marketing business in the neighbouring town. In 1937, the market was taken over by another auctioneer, and a local company was formed with a capital of £500. Here is an important point: Application was made then to the East Suffolk County Council for approval and authority to use it as a livestock market—this was only last year—and the East Suffolk County Council sent an inspector. They stated: "We will approve of this being used as a market if certain expenditure is undertaken to bring it up to our requirements." Something over £300 was spent about a year ago in so doing, and the East Suffolk County Council authorised it to be used as a livestock market. My right hon. Friend will understand that it is extremely hard that the whole of that capital should be completely lost, although it was spent in perfect good faith.
As regards the use of the market, I would mention that in the last six or eight months the market has increased. It is a fortnightly market, and every fortnight nearly 500 pigs and 50 or 60 cattle are sold. One of the results is that more pigs are being kept in the neighbourhood in small homes, because the people claim that they can get better prices at Bungay than in the neighbouring market. I have a letter from an ex-service man who is a smallholder, and he writes as follows:
As a smallholder I would be prepared to keep more pigs and poultry if a market were held at Bungay and this is the case with several others in similar circumstances. We require a market here, as the cost of transport is very high and also loss of time is a big item in sending stock to a distant market.
I have handed to my right hon. Friend a petition signed by over 700 inhabitants, including all the smallholders and farmers in the district. The urban district council has passed a unanimous resolution asking for the retention of this market. The whole town and district are asking that the market should be retained There is consternation at the action of the Livestock Commission.
I appeal for a public inquiry if possible. The "Eastern Daily Press," in a leading article, used these words, which I commend to my right hon. Friend:


One of His. Majesty's judges has well said that it is necessary not only that justice should be done but that it should manifestly appear to be done. The same remark might well apply to the proceedings of Government Departments outside the courts. The closure of Bungay market is a case in point.
That is the reason why I am pressing for an inquiry. I know we are told that we live in a period of centralisation. Efficiency and rationalisation are the watchwords of the age, just as 150 years ago the watchwords were "Liberty, equality and fraternity." This is the new bureaucratic revolution, and these are the watchwords, but I think I have proved that it does not make for efficiency, that the smallholders get better prices at less cost, and therefore the argument of efficiency breaks down.
What is this argument of efficiency? Are we not at the present day tending to mistake the means for the end? Efficiency is merely a means towards leading a full and satisfactory life, and I feel that probably to-day, more than ever, we are so concentrating on the means that we forget the ends of life. Certainly, in the countryside the end is to preserve the amenities and make the countryside agreeable to the people by preserving the traditions of these small country towns. I appeal to my right hon. Friend to inquire into and reconsider this matter. I remember as a schoolboy reading of Rhadamanthus, in Book VI of Virgil:
castigat judicatque"—
he chastises and judges. The Livestock Commission have chastised; I ask the Minister not to be more severe than Rhadamanthus, but, after the execution, at least to have an inquiry. I feel that if we do anything to damage and destroy these small market towns we do a real injury to our countryside. It is part of the historic heritage of England, and if we destroy and damage it I believe we are doing a hurt to the soul of England, and that is the last thing that a Conservative Minister should do.

The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. W. S. Morrison): I am sure the House will have sympathy with my hon. Friend in raising this matter, and certainly his constituents have cause to compliment themselves on his assiduity in pursuing this topic. I should not like the House to think that this is a case of the Commission closing a market. It is a question of using the

powers which Parliament gives of refusing to license or approve a market on premises where no livestock market was held during the year ending November, 1936.

Mr. Loftus: That is disputed.

Mr. Morrison: The only dispute that my hon. Friend brought out was that some advertisement was mentioned—this is the first that I have heard of it—of a sale. My information is that in fact no sale of livestock was held during the statutory year in question, and it therefore falls to the Livestock Commission to enforce the law. In these circumstances I have no power to intervene. It is a question that was left by Parliament entirely at the discretion of the Livestock Commission who are only bound to consult the bodies concerned first, and then the Livestock Advisory Committee, which is a thoroughly representative body. That they have done. It was on the advice of the Livestock Advisory Committee and after consultation with the bodies concerned that the Commission came to the conclusion that they should not allow this market to be opened on premises where no market had in fact been held during the year.
If one notices the history of this market one will not be surprised that the Livestock Advisory Committee and the Commission came to the conclusion that they did. The history is as follows, so I am informed. There was a market in Bungay from 1850 to 1900, when sales of livestock ceased altogether. In the next 29 years no livestock sales were held in Bungay. There were sales of dead stock, I am informed, but no livestock sales at all. In 1929 a stock market company was formed but it met with very mixed success. My hon. Friend says it is not true that very few stock were sold there but the figures are these:

1932: 1 calf and 30 pigs.
1934: 9 pigs, 2 sheep.
1936: No live animals at all.

In 1937 the lessees' tenancy expired and they did not renew their lease. The present lessee took over and held his first sale there in January, 1938, but he appears to have been in ignorance of the fact that the Livestock Industry Act was passed six months previously, as were the East Suffolk County Council. He applied for a licence, which was granted. Then


the market tenant seems to have realised his position. He applied to the Livestock Commission for approval for Bungay market, but, as no market had been held there during the period laid down, they refused approval. In reaching that decision I have no doubt both the Commission and the Livestock Advisory Committee were influenced by the history I have narrated in addition to the fact that there are 12 livestock markets within 15 miles of Bungay and five within a radius of io miles. The chief livestock trade at this market has always been in pigs. These are animals notoriously difficult to conduct to a destination on their own feet, and they are therefore transported on a lorry. Therefore, there are adequate facilities for sales in that district.
From 1929 to 1937 the figures show that by far the chief trade at this market has been poultry and dead stock. I would point out that poultry and dead stock are not in any way interfered with by the Livestock Industry Act, and people can sell their poultry and dead stock there as long as they like. It is only cattle, sheep and pigs that are affected. I am sorry for Mr. Hunt, who appears to be a man of great ability, and to have expended money in ignorance of his legal position, but I see no reason to interfere, even if I had the power, with the Commission or the Livestock Advisory Committee. They seem to have acted after careful

consideration, in accordance with the spirit of the Act, and for the greatest good of the greatest number.

Mr. Loftus: Is it not a fact that there have been two markets in the Eastern counties which were not used in 1936 and yet which have been authorised by my right hon. Friend—I think one is at Saffron Walden—to be utilised?

Mr. W. S. Morrison: No, Sir, they have not been authorised by me. The Livestock Commission are empowered by the Act, where a market has not been held; to approve that a market should be held if they are of opinion that additional facilities are required. If they came to such a conclusion that fact does not in any way affect their judgment in the case of Bungay, where they came to the deliberate conclusion, on the facts that I have mentioned, that those facilities were not required. The fact that they did approve facilities in a district where they thought adequate facilities were not provided, shows that they have acted in this case with a proper regard to the circumstances.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-nine Minutes after Eleven o'Clock.